<p>A new issue of conflict between Governors and the governments of non-BJP-ruled states is the delay in giving assent to bills passed by state legislatures. Tamil Nadu Governor R N Ravi and the Governors of Kerala, Telangana and Chhattisgarh have held back indefinitely their assent to a number of bills passed by the respective state Assemblies.</p>.<p>The Governors are using their power of assent as a new weapon in their confrontation with state governments. The Tamil Nadu Assembly passed a resolution this week requesting the Union government and the President to “immediately issue appropriate instructions to the Governor to provide assent to the bills passed by the state Assembly within a specific time period.” The Telangana government has petitioned the Supreme Court to declare the delay by the Governor to give assent to a bill as illegal, irregular, and unconstitutional. The Kerala government is also planning to do so. </p>.<p><strong>Read | <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/opinion/comment/do-we-need-governors-1203830.html" target="_blank">Do we need governors?</a></strong></p>.<p>The Constitution gives the Governor the power to sign a bill passed by a state Assembly into law. Article 200 gives the Governor three options in this. One is to give assent. The second is to send it to the President. The third is to withhold assent and send it back to the legislature “as soon as possible” with comments. If the legislature passes it again, the Governor has no option but to give assent to it. But the Constitution has not specified the period for which the Governor can keep a bill without taking a decision. The Governors are now exploiting this to delay their decisions on bills. The Tamil Nadu Governor has even said that the withholding of a bill is equivalent to its rejection. The Governor has no power to interpret the Constitution and to reject a bill. The Supreme Court and High Courts have asserted a number of times that the Governor has to abide by the aid and advice of the cabinet and only the legislature has the power to make and unmake laws. So no Governor can take an action or refrain from an action which would amount to interference with the law-making powers of the legislature. </p>.<p>By withholding their assent to bills, the Governors are dishonouring the legislature. They also paralyse the governance and administration of a state by blocking a bill from becoming the law. It is the legislature that decides what laws are needed for the state and it is for the state government to implement them. The Governor has no effective role in this. All states should take up the matter with the Centre and the President and, if necessary,<br />with the Supreme Court, so that Governors do not create a situation where normal governance becomes impossible. </p>
<p>A new issue of conflict between Governors and the governments of non-BJP-ruled states is the delay in giving assent to bills passed by state legislatures. Tamil Nadu Governor R N Ravi and the Governors of Kerala, Telangana and Chhattisgarh have held back indefinitely their assent to a number of bills passed by the respective state Assemblies.</p>.<p>The Governors are using their power of assent as a new weapon in their confrontation with state governments. The Tamil Nadu Assembly passed a resolution this week requesting the Union government and the President to “immediately issue appropriate instructions to the Governor to provide assent to the bills passed by the state Assembly within a specific time period.” The Telangana government has petitioned the Supreme Court to declare the delay by the Governor to give assent to a bill as illegal, irregular, and unconstitutional. The Kerala government is also planning to do so. </p>.<p><strong>Read | <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/opinion/comment/do-we-need-governors-1203830.html" target="_blank">Do we need governors?</a></strong></p>.<p>The Constitution gives the Governor the power to sign a bill passed by a state Assembly into law. Article 200 gives the Governor three options in this. One is to give assent. The second is to send it to the President. The third is to withhold assent and send it back to the legislature “as soon as possible” with comments. If the legislature passes it again, the Governor has no option but to give assent to it. But the Constitution has not specified the period for which the Governor can keep a bill without taking a decision. The Governors are now exploiting this to delay their decisions on bills. The Tamil Nadu Governor has even said that the withholding of a bill is equivalent to its rejection. The Governor has no power to interpret the Constitution and to reject a bill. The Supreme Court and High Courts have asserted a number of times that the Governor has to abide by the aid and advice of the cabinet and only the legislature has the power to make and unmake laws. So no Governor can take an action or refrain from an action which would amount to interference with the law-making powers of the legislature. </p>.<p>By withholding their assent to bills, the Governors are dishonouring the legislature. They also paralyse the governance and administration of a state by blocking a bill from becoming the law. It is the legislature that decides what laws are needed for the state and it is for the state government to implement them. The Governor has no effective role in this. All states should take up the matter with the Centre and the President and, if necessary,<br />with the Supreme Court, so that Governors do not create a situation where normal governance becomes impossible. </p>