The Indian Governor: Constitutional Sentinel Or Ceremonial Figurehead?
- IJLLR Journal
- Jun 30
- 1 min read
Praneel M. Gogoi, B.A. LL.B., Pravin Gandhi College of Law, Mumbai
ABSTRACT
The recent judgment of the Supreme Court in The State of Tamil Nadu v. The Governor of Tamil Nadu has settled various questions pertaining to the extent of gubernatorial discretion. The cause of action of the aggrieved petitioners lay in the absence of an explicit timeline in Article 200, which enabled the Governor to keep several Bills passed by the legislature in indefinite limbo, which in formal terms constitutes a ‘pocket veto’. The Court declared that the Constitution has no scope for a pocket veto, and any inaction by the Governor exceeding the judicially prescribed timelines is justiciable. The lack of an explicit timeline or indeed, explicit procedural mandates in the Constitution is not an omission on the part of the framers, but rather a deliberate safety valve in exigencies. The question arises what the new role of the Governor is post State of Tamil Nadu. The paper analyzes whether the Governor can still function as a ‘friend, philosopher and guide’ to his Council of Ministers or if his role is completely bound by the aid and advice of his Council. This research employs an analysis of the constitutional framework chiefly surrounding the temporal facets of Article 200, superimposing the same with the powers vested in the President of India, analyzing subsequent judicial interpretations and drawing relevant comparisons to foreign jurisdictions.
Keywords: Gubernatorial discretion, Article 200, pocket veto, justiciability of inaction.
