Kerala’s Legal Clash: President Under Fire for Bill Withholding

In the aftermath of the Supreme Court’s reservation of judgment on the Kerala government’s plea for temporary relief in a legal dispute over a cap on the state’s net borrowing, the state has taken an unprecedented step by once again approaching the apex court against President Droupadi Murmu for refusing assent to four Bills passed by the Kerala Legislature.

The state government’s petition asserts that the President, acting upon the advice of the Council of Ministers, has failed to provide any justification for withholding assent to four out of seven Bills forwarded by the Governor. This action, the plea contends, is highly arbitrary and runs afoul of Article 14 of the Constitution, along with Articles 200 and 201.

Furthermore, the plea emphasizes the necessity of drawing the President’s attention to specific provisions of state law ostensibly conflicting with central legislation to justify withholding assent. However, in this instance, none of the four bills under scrutiny are shown to contradict or infringe upon any central laws, rendering the withholding of assent without constitutional basis.

The state government argues for the recall of the reference to the President concerning the seven Bills on grounds of constitutional morality.

It also condemns the Union government’s role in advising the President to withhold assent to bills passed by the state legislature months, if not years, prior, asserting that such actions undermine the federal structure of the Constitution and encroach upon state jurisdiction.

Moreover, the state criticizes the Governor’s practice of withholding Bills for extended periods before submitting them for the President’s consideration without valid constitutional reasons, deeming it arbitrary and violative of Article 14 and Article 21 of the Constitution.

The plea maintains that under Articles 200 and 213, a Bill can only be reserved for the President’s consideration if its provisions necessitate prior presidential sanction for introduction into the Legislature. It further argues the necessity of reserving bills containing specific provisions for presidential assent as per relevant constitutional articles, which would otherwise render them invalid or derogatory to High Court powers.

Highlighting the delay in addressing bills spanning over two years, the state asserts that the Governor has effectively rendered the functioning of the state legislature futile. Despite being part of the legislative assembly, the Governor is bound to act upon the advice of the cabinet of ministers, as prescribed by Article 200.

The four bills in question are: 1) University Laws (Amendment) (No. 2) Bill, 2021 – Bill No. 50, 2) the Kerala Co-operative Societies (Amendment) Bill, 2022 – Bill No. 110, 3) the University Laws (Amendment) Bill, 2022 – Bill No. 132, and 4) the University Laws (Amendment) (No. 3) Bill, 2022 – Bill No. 150, which the state urges for the Honorable President’s consideration and subsequent dismissal.