Kerala V/S Arif Khan: Supreme Court Asked To Set Guidelines For Governor To Approve Bills Within Defined Timeframe

Kerala has approached the Supreme Court with a request to establish guidelines regarding the conditions in which the Governor can reserve Bills for the President's consideration, withhold his approval, or send it back to the Legislative Assembly.

For the second time in a fortnight, Kerala has taken legal action against the Governor by approaching the Supreme Court. Recently, through an amendment to its initial writ petition submitted to the Supreme Court, the State has increased its plea.

Kerala has also requested the Supreme Court's assistance in interpreting the term "as soon as possible" found in the first proviso to Article 200 of the Constitution, which pertains to the time frame for the governor to dispose of the Bills presented to him.

According to Article 200, the Governor has the discretion to either forward the Bills to the President, withhold approval, or promptly send it back to the Assembly.

CK Sasi, the State's standing counsel, reiterated the request to proclaim that the Governor neglected his constitutional responsibilities and powers due to his inaction on the Bills brought forward for his review.

According to The Hindu, Kerala has also requested the court to direct the Governor to expedite the process of dealing with the pending bills without any additional delay.

Kerala highlighted that numerous states were encountering a comparable predicament where Governors were allowing Bills to remain unresolved for excessive lengths of time and not utilising their authority under Article 200 of the Constitution, thereby making the State Legislatures impotent.

When the Supreme Court reconvenes following the Christmas break, it is expected to take up the case for consideration.