Supreme Court Hearing-Presidential Reference On Timelines For Bills' Assent-DAY-8 : Live Updates

Venugopal: the reason why I say it should be forthwith, even money bills which requires urgency, the Governor has to deal with it as soon as possible. Even if it was not provided, when Governor has money bills, it has to deal with it forthwith. There is no question of him harboring discretion in terms of money bill. He has five choices- reservation for President, money bill which stands on separate footing, third is to grant assent, refer bills with amendments to the legislature with message, and fifth is to withhold assent.

CJI: You are supporting the Solicitor?

Venugopal: he has to play a pragmatic role in granting assent

Sr Adv KK Venugopal: the entirety of Article 200 and 201, it mandates the Governor to act in terms provided.

Referring to a judgment, as soon as possible- means to do it with reasonable time, with an understanding to do it within the shortest time.

Gopal: it is also not correct to assume that a judgment can be overruled in presidential reference.

CJI asked what happens to A. 145(3)-except 143, all other Articles deal with powers of Supreme Court which are adjudicatory. It has to be read with Article 32...I have an appendix where all provisions are laid down where Governor acts on aid and advice.

Gopal concludes his arguments.

Gopal: on deemed assent, in TN, the court in exercise of Article 142 invoked deemed assent in respect of 10 Bills, the declare was made consider the peculiar circumstances the act...the court concluded that Governor's act lacked bona fide-it held that in circumstances, it would be difficult to repose trust and remand the matter back. These directions maintained the dignity of the office of the Governor.

Gopal: on falls through, it falls on the floor of the House-it is not passed again. In Kameshwar and Valluri concluded that the Governor withholds the assent unless the first proviso is followed- it does not suggest that the Governor withholds the Bill

On timelines, at outset, it is submitted that questions 5 and 7 are premised on factual statements. It is submitted that it fails to appreciate that as soon as possible is a term of art which mandates urgency. Prescription of timeline is necessary for access to courts. There are guidelines to regulate when judicial review becomes available. In Tamil Nadu, it provided a guideline for the court to exercise restraint to act till that time...It does not lead to automatic deemed assent, but for the courts to have judicial review. It was adopted by timelines adopted by the Ministry of Home Affairs in their memodrandum.

Gopal: Union of India relies on 'may' of first proviso to contend that it is not mandatory to take recourse to first proviso-but it denotes that the use of expression was applicable to when the Governor withholds. It is rightly affirmed in Tamil Nadu and Punjab judgments.

Gopal: first proviso requires Governor to return the bill for reconsideration as soon as possible- it imposes constitutional urgency, it necessarily implies the mandatory action.

Gopal: Union submits Governor has unqualified discretion to veto- it is contended that first proviso provides fourth option-contrary and errorneous, any interpretation providing unqualified veto is antiethical.

Gopal: Governor assent under Article 200 becomes a part of legislative procedure, the submission of Union that it confers legislative power is liable to be rejected. Governor must follow one of the three options under Article 200 under aid and advice- grant assent, return to the assembly, and reserve for the President.

This court in five separate occasions held that substantive power of Article 200, the Governor is bound to follow one of the three options.

Governor shall declare- it does not have independent meant, it is a form of action-assent, return to the House, reserve for President's consideration- no two separate acts.

J Narasimha: it excludes pocket veto

Gopal: Article 158(1) -Governor does not have the right to participate in the deliberation of the house, they don't have the right to vote.