The Supreme Court has reserved its verdict on whether Governors and the President must follow a fixed timeline to approve bills. The matter came from a Presidential reference filed by Droupadi Murmu, who sought clarity on pending legislation.
During hearings, the Centre argued that strict deadlines could weaken constitutional balance and reduce discretionary powers of constitutional heads. Tamil Nadu, Kerala, and Punjab countered this view, saying deadlines are essential to protect democracy and ensure accountability.
Earlier, the Supreme Court ruled in the Tamil Nadu case that Governors cannot keep bills pending indefinitely. The judges said action must be taken within a reasonable period. The new case expands that principle to include the President’s role as well.
The final verdict is expected to clarify the powers of Governors and the President. It may also set guidelines for handling bills in the future. Political circles across the country are watching closely, as the decision could reshape Centre–state relations.
