In a setback to Punjab Governor Banwarilal Purohit, the Supreme Court on Friday directed him to decide on the four bills presented to him for assent, while upholding the validity of the budget session reconvened on June 19/20 in which these four bills were passed with an overwhelming majority by the State assembly.
Upholding the validity of the reconvened two-day budget session on June 19/20, that was earlier adjourned sine die on March 22, Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud heading a bench also comprising Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice Manoj Misra, said, “Any attempt (by the Governor) to cast doubts on the validity of the session of the legislature would be fraught with great perils to democracy. The Speaker, who has been recognised to be the guardian of privileges of the House was acting in his jurisdiction in adjourning the House sine die and and reconvening it on June 19/20, 2023 in which these four bills were passed.”
Stating that casting doubt on the validity of a session is not a “constitutional option open to the Governor” – a titular head and supposed to be a constitutional statesman – the bench said that the State assembly comprises the elected representatives to which the State government is accountable.
The top court said this in its order and in the course of the hearing of Punjab government’s plea seeking declaration that the reconvinced budget session of the State assembly on June 19/20 was valid.
Taking exception to Governor Purohit questioning the validity of the reconvened budget session on June 19/20 and consequently the validity of the bills passed, Chief Justice Chandrachud said, “You are playing with fire by questioning validly passed bill …What will happen to the parliamentary form of government?”
It further questioned the governor, saying, “How can you sit on a judgment whether the session is valid?” and stated that “The Governor as an appointee of the President is the titular head of the state was intended only to be a Constitutional statesman to guide the government on matters of constitutional concern”
Having taken a dim view of the way Governor Purohit has acted, the bench also questioned the Punjab government the way it was stretching the budget session convened on March 3, adjourned sine die on March 22, reconvened on June 19/20 and again on October 19/20, without proroguing it.
The bench wondered with the Monsoon session having been given a miss, when the winter session of state assembly would be held.
“All these subterfuges don’t augur well for democracy,” CJI Chandrachud said as senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi appearing for the Punjab government sought to give some legal justification for it.
Telling the Punjab government that it too has to act above board, the chief justice said, “How can sessions be adjourned sine die like this? If democracy has to work, it has to work in the hands of chief ministers and governors… You cannot defeat the rules of the Legislative Assembly merely by saying that we are not proroguing the house.”