Gubernatorial Inaction And The Federal Fracture: A Critical Analysis Of Article 200 As A Tool Of Executive Obstruction
- IJLLR Journal
- 2 hours ago
- 1 min read
Gurnoor Kaur, University Institute of Laws, Panjab University Regional Centre, Ludhiana
I. ABSTRACT
This paper investigates the constitutional crisis caused by the indefinite withholding of assent by Governors under Article 200 of the Indian Constitution. Focusing on the period between 2023 and 2025, it examines how the ambiguity of "as soon as possible" has been exploited as a "Pocket Veto." By analysing the landmark judgments of the Punjab and Kerala High Courts and the authoritative Special Reference Case No. 1 of 2025, the study contends that although the Governor has constitutional discretion, "unexplained inaction" amounts to a justiciable breach of constitutional morality.
II. Introduction
Constitutions are not only - and perhaps not even primarily - statements of national identity and aspiration that serve to differentiate countries from one another. They are also written to satisfy and influence diverse audiences, ranging from domestic constituencies whose support is needed to ensure regime stability, to foreign investors who seek assurance that their investments are safe from expropriation, to other countries whose approbation is crucial to securing diplomatic recognition and national security."
The constitutional architect, Dr B.R. Ambedkar, envisaged the Governor as a "ceremonial device" primarily intended to facilitate, not obstruct, the legislative will of a state. Therefore, by excluding the phrase ‘in his discretion’ from the draft article, the Constitution framers aimed to restrict the actions of the governor to following the advice of his council of ministers. Additionally, when addressing the powers of the governors, they explicitly chose the stance
