SC judgment on T.N. Governor addresses a Constitutional silence, Pg 16

• Supreme Court mandates Governors must decide on Bills within 3 months, ending the practice of indefinite withholding of assent.

• Addresses long-standing Constitutional silence, as Article 200 of the Constitution doesnt fix time limits for Governors.

• Comes amid rising conflict between Governors and elected State governments (West Bengal, Tamil Nadu, Punjab, Kerala).

• TN Governor accused of political bias and delays, particularly in referring Bills to President.

• Bench of Justices J.B. Pardiwala & R. Mahadevan held that delay beyond 3 months is unconstitutional.

• Builds on 2023 Punjab ruling on real power resting with elected representatives.

• Warns that Governors inaction or delay is liable to judicial scrutiny.

• Supreme Court also signalled fixing time limits for Speakers in anti-defection proceedings (Tenth Schedule), citing 2020 Keisham Meghachandra Singh judgment.

• Reinforces institutional checks on both constitutional offices to prevent political misuse.

• The ruling strengthens democratic accountability and limits discretionary power misuse by Governors.

• Recommendations: Codify roles of constitutional authorities (like Governors and Speakers), ensure timely decision-making through statutory timelines.

Mains Mock Question:

"Critically examine the constitutional role of Governors in India. How does the recent Supreme Court judgment attempt to curb the misuse of discretionary powers?"