NDLI: State of Punjab Vs. Principal Secretary to The Governor of Punjab and Another

Content Provider	Supreme Court of India
e-ISSN	30484839
Language	English
Access Restriction	NDLI
Subject Keyword	Constitution of India
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Law Judgement
Jurisdiction	India
Act(s) Referred	Constitution of India
Case(s) Referred	Referred Case 0 Referred Case 1 Referred Case 2 Referred Case 3
Case Type	Writ Petition
Court	Supreme Court of India
Disposal Nature	Petition Disposed Off
Headnote	Issue for consideration: (i) Whether the Governor can withhold action on Bills which have been passed by the State Legislature; (ii) Whether it is permissible in law for the Speaker to reconvene a sitting of a Vidhan Sabha session which has been adjourned but has not been prorogued. Constitution of India – Art. 200 – The Governor is a symbolic head and cannot withhold action on Bills passed by the State Legislature:Held: The Governor, as an unelected Head of the State, is entrusted with certain constitutional powers – However, this power cannot be used to thwart the normal course of lawmaking by the State Legislatures – Consequently, if the Governor decides to withhold assent under the substantive part of Art. 200, the logical course of action is to pursue the course indicated in the first proviso of remitting the Bill to the state legislature for reconsideration – In other words, the power to withhold assent under the substantive part of Art. 200 must be read together with the consequential course of action to be adopted by the Governor under the first proviso – If the first proviso is not read in juxtaposition to the power to withhold assent conferred by the substantive part of Art. 200, the Governor as the unelected Head of State would be in a position to virtually veto the functioning of the legislative domain by a duly elected legislature by simply declaring that assent is withheld without any further recourse – Such a course of action would be contrary to fundamental principles of a constitutional democracy based on a Parliamentary pattern of governance – Therefore, when the Governor decides to withhold assent under the substantive part of Art. 200, the course of action which is to be followed is that which is indicated in the first proviso – The Governor is u/Art. 168 a part of the legislature and is bound by the constitutional regime – In the instant case, the Governor of Punjab was not empowered to withhold action on the Bills passed by the State Legislature and must act “as soon as possible” – In any event, it was legally permissible for the Speaker to reconvene the Vidhan Sabha because (a) there is a distinction between adjournment and prorogation; and (b) the Speaker has exclusive jurisdiction over regulating the procedure of the House. [Paras 25, 28]Constitution of India – Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business in the Punjab Vidhan Sabha (Punjab Legislative Assembly) – r.16 – Reconvening a sitting of the Vidhan Sabha which has not been prorogued is permissible in law and is within the exclusive domain of the Speaker:Held: Rule 16 indicates that the Vidhan Sabha may be adjourned by its own order from time to time – This is however subject to the provisions of the Constitution and the Rules – In terms of the first proviso, a motion for adjournment either to a day or sine die requires consultation with the Speaker – Significantly, in terms of the second proviso, the Speaker is empowered in public interest to call a meeting of the Vidhan Sabha earlier than the date to which it has been adjourned or at any time after it has been adjourned sine die – So, it is clear that the Rules of Procedure expressly recognize a situation where the Speaker reconvenes a sitting of the Vidhan Sabha which has been adjourned sine die but not prorogued – The provision empowering the Speaker to reconvene a sitting of the Vidhan Sabha on any date after it has been adjourned sine die is not unique to the Rules of Procedure of the Punjab Vidhan Sabha – A review of the Rules of Procedure of State Legislatures for various states indicates that almost all of them contain an identical or similar provision – Therefore, it was legally permissible for the Speaker to reconvene the sitting of the Vidhan Sabha after it was adjourned sine die without prorogation – Further, the Speaker was empowered as the sole custodian of the proceedings of the House to adjourn and reconvene the House. [Paras 34, 35, 41]Constitution of India – Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business in the Punjab Vidhan Sabha (Punjab Legislative Assembly) – The dispute in the present case essentially bears upon the Governor having detained four Bills which were passed by the Vidhan Sabha on 20.06.2023:Held: There is no valid constitutional basis to cast doubt on the validity of the session of the Vidhan Sabha which was held on 19.06.2023, 20.06.2023 and 20.10.2023 – Any attempt to cast doubt on the session of the legislature would be replete with grave perils to democracy – The Speaker who has been recognized to be a guardian of the privileges of the House and the constitutionally recognized authority who represents the House, was acting well within his jurisdiction in adjourning the House sine die – The reconvening of the House was within the ambit of Rule 16 of the Rules of Procedure – Casting doubt on the validity of the session of the House is not a constitutional option open to the Governor – The Legislative Assembly comprises of duly elected Members of the Legislature – During the tenure of the Assembly, the House is governed by the decisions which are taken by the Speaker in matters of adjournment and prorogation – Therefore, this Court is of the considered view that the Governor of Punjab must now proceed to take a decision on the Bills which have been submitted for assent on the basis that the sitting of the House which was conducted on 19.06.2023, 20.06.2023 and 20.10.2023 was constitutionally valid. [Para 44]
Judge	Hon'ble Dr. Justice D.Y. Chandrachud
Neutral Citation	2023 INSC 1017
Petitioner	State Of Punjab
Respondent	Principal Secretary To The Governor Of Punjab And Another
SCR	[2023] 15 S.C.R. 777
Judgement Date	2023-11-10
Case Number	1224

Sl.	Authority	Responsibilities	Communication Details
1	Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education	Sanctioning Authority	https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives
2	Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project	https://www.iitkgp.ac.in
3	National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in
4	Project PI / Joint PI	Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon
5	Website/Portal (Helpdesk)	Queries regarding NDLI and its services	support@ndl.gov.in
6	Contents and Copyright Issues	Queries related to content curation and copyright issues	content@ndl.gov.in
7	National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club)	Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach	clubsupport@ndl.gov.in
8	Digital Preservation Centre (DPC)	Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books	dpc@ndl.gov.in
9	IDR Setup or Support	Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops	idr@ndl.gov.in

State of Punjab Vs. Principal Secretary to The Governor of Punjab and Another

Please Log-in to view this content

State of Punjab Vs. Principal Secretary to The Governor of Punjab and Another

Shanti Bhushan Vs. Supreme Court of India Through Its Registrar and Another

Ramdhandas and Another Vs. The State of Punjab

Veeramani Vs. State of Tamil Nadu

Virendra Vs. The State of Punjab and Another

Arvinder Singh Vs. State of U.p. and Ors.

M.c. Mehta Vs. State Of.tamil Nadu

Laxmibai Chandaragi& Anr. Vs. The State of Karnatka & Ors.

Sube Singh Vs. State of Haryana and Ors.

State of Punjab Vs. Principal Secretary to The Governor of Punjab and Another

State of Punjab Vs. Principal Secretary to The Governor of Punjab and Another

Please Log-in to view this content

Similar Documents

State of Punjab Vs. Principal Secretary to The Governor of Punjab and Another

Shanti Bhushan Vs. Supreme Court of India Through Its Registrar and Another

Ramdhandas and Another Vs. The State of Punjab

Veeramani Vs. State of Tamil Nadu

Virendra Vs. The State of Punjab and Another

Arvinder Singh Vs. State of U.p. and Ors.

M.c. Mehta Vs. State Of.tamil Nadu

Laxmibai Chandaragi& Anr. Vs. The State of Karnatka & Ors.

Sube Singh Vs. State of Haryana and Ors.

State of Punjab Vs. Principal Secretary to The Governor of Punjab and Another