Image for illustration purposes only. | Photo credit: File
The Communist Party of India (Marxist) on Saturday expressed disappointment over the Supreme Court’s response to the presidential reference, saying it would only “endorse extra-constitutional powers exercised by governors in opposition-ruled states”.
It argued that the apex court’s reply “will in no way check the onslaught on states’ rights that is taking place due to over-centralization of powers in the hands of the Centre”.
The Supreme Court ruled last Thursday that the court cannot impose any time limits on governors and the president to give their assent to bills passed by state assemblies, but said governors do not have “unlimited” powers to sit on laws “in perpetuity.”
In a statement issued here on Saturday, the Left party reiterated that the apex court’s stand on the presidential reference was “disappointing” and said it lacked any constitutional check and balance on the “arbitrary functioning of governors who act as political agents of the Centre”.
“The Supreme Court’s advisory opinion on the presidential reference regarding the powers of governors under Article 200 of the Constitution is disappointing. It will in no way check the onslaught on states’ rights that is taking place due to excessive centralization of powers in the hands of the Centre,” the CPI(M) said.
“By giving governors discretionary powers to deal with bills passed by state legislatures and no time limits, the opinion will only encourage extra-constitutional powers exercised by governors in opposition-controlled states,” he said.
The Left Party said it was “particularly retrograde” to suggest that the governor is not required to give his assent to a bill that has been passed by the state legislature a second time after being sent for reconsideration by the governor.
The governor can instead refer the bill to the president, delaying it indefinitely, he said.
“The only relief is that judicial intervention may be limited in the face of prolonged inaction by the governor on a pending bill. Even that is ambiguous and vague because there is no definition of what constitutes prolonged inaction or delay.”
“The Supreme Court’s guidance thus lacks any constitutional check and balance on the arbitrary functioning of governors who act as political agents of the Centre,” the party said.
Published – 22 Nov 2025 21:05 IST
