Bills passed by the legislature become law only if there comes a valid signature from the governor. As per the norm, if any doubt emerges, the governor will enquire about it and will lend his signature after clearing all queries. But in the last two years, Kerala Governor Arif Muhammad Khan has adopted a different formula, that is by putting deadlock on eight crucial bills. Now, the governor's antics even forced the Kerala government to reach the footsteps of the Supreme Court to seek justice, akin to neighbour Tamil Nadu. Even the Aam Aadmi government in Punjab has reached SC after getting tired of battling the governor in the state.

While considering the cases, Chief Justice of India, Dr D.Y. Chandrachud lambasted the governors' attitude and asked them to realize that they are not any representative of the people. A three-member bench chaired by CJI Chandrachud considered the case.

The previous day, while talking to the media, the Governor of Kerala gave an indication that he would not compromise in any way from the ensuing fight with the government. The governor also blamed the government's work and approach on certain sections, in a style that sounded similar to the opposition's usual diatribe against the government. Of the eight bills to be signed by the governor, two have been heavily contested. One is a bill that replaces the governor as chancellor of universities and provides for the appointment of high-ranking academicians. The government brought such a bill when the governor started interfering excessively in the administration of the universities as the chancellor. Another controversial bill is to replace the current no-appeal system in the Lokayukta with an appellate system involving the Chief Minister.

Albeit the reasoning produced by the governor, it is the democratic right of every elected government to bring changes if they feel the need. Governors are appointed as representatives of the central government and have hitherto not been seen intruding this much into state matters.

Kerala has seen many eminent governors completing their terms in a soothing manner sans any scuffles with the government. It is to be keenly noted that, in the BJP-ruled states in the country, there is no ruckus reported between the governor and the government. But in states like Tamil Nadu, Bengal, Kerala and Punjab, governors are creating various obstacles by playing politics. This does not augur well for the smooth running of democracy. If the Governor does not sign the bill within a certain period of time, then there should be a law to consider the bill as law.

What is the need for a governor if the whole work is stalled for the between part of the year? Amendments are the need of the hour and it is all up to the constitutional experts to decide about a new provision that will allow the appointment of governor, only if the state demands it.