'Should we just sit and watch?'; SC raps central govt over Governors' withholding bills

NEW DELHI: A five-judge constitution bench asked the central government whether the Supreme Court should stand by helplessly if the Governor withholds bills passed by the assembly. The court raised the question when Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the centre, informed that the Governor can refrain from taking action on the bills.

“If the Governor does not exercise the power vested in him and does not take a decision on the bills for many years, cannot that matter be subjected to judicial scrutiny?” Chief Justice Gavai also asked whether the court has no power to intervene if the responsibility is not fulfilled, no matter how high the constitutional position is.

The court was hearing arguments on the validity of the reference sent by the President to the Supreme Court following the verdict setting a deadline for the President and the Governor to decide on the bills. The hearing will continue on the 26th.

The Solicitor General argued that there are some issues that the judiciary cannot resolve.

“They should be resolved through a political democratic process. If the Governor is stuck on the bills, there is a political solution. State governments should not run to the Supreme Court. The Chief Minister can raise the issue with the President and the Prime Minister. If there is a complaint, the Governor can be called back. A new official can also be appointed. Why not trust the process?” The Solicitor General also said that the court cannot set a time limit. The Chief Justice responded that they had complaints from four states and thus the matter carried weight.