How is it 'false alarm' when Bills kept pending for 4 years, SC asks Centre

Key Highlights:

• The Supreme Court questioned the Centre's claim that states are raising "false alarms" regarding pending Bills with the Governor.
• The Chief Justice of India highlighted instances where Bills have been pending with the Governor for as long as four years.
• The Solicitor General argued against fixed timelines for Governors to clear Bills, emphasizing political dialogue and discretion.
• The Supreme Court bench is hearing a reference made by the President regarding deadlines for clearing state Bills.

Detailed Insights:

• The core issue revolves around the Governor's role in assenting to Bills passed by state legislatures and the timelines for doing so.
• The Solicitor General asserted that the Governor is not a "rubber stamp" and should have discretion, as the Constitution doesn't prescribe a time limit.
• The Supreme Court emphasized the importance of the Basic Structure doctrine, which came into existence through judicial intervention.
• The debate includes arguments about whether the Governor's role should be purely formal or involve collaborative consultation.
• The President's reference to the Supreme Court seeks clarity on the extent of the Governor's discretionary powers concerning state Bills.

Key Concepts Involved:

• Bill: A draft legislative proposal that becomes law after being passed and assented to.
• Governor: The constitutional head of a state, appointed by the President, with powers and duties defined by the Constitution.
• Basic Structure: A judicial doctrine that certain fundamental features of the Constitution cannot be altered by amendments.