SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
DHANANJAYA Y. CHANDRACHUD, CJI., PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA, J.
State of Punjab - Petitioner
Versus
Principal Secretary to the Governor of Punjab and Another - Respondents
Writ Petition (Civil) No. 302 of 2023
Decided On : 28-02-2023
Constitutional Duties - Summoning of Legislative Assembly - Article 174(1) of the Constitution - Article 167 - Article 174
Fact of the Case:
The Governor of Punjab sought information from the Chief Minister on specific issues, and the Chief Minister responded in a manner that was deemed derogatory and unconstitutional. The Governor's inaction in summoning the Legislative Assembly for the Budget Session led to the State of Punjab seeking a declaration from the Court.
Finding of the Court:
The Court found that the Governor is duty bound to act on the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers in summoning the Legislative Assembly, and the Chief Minister is obligated to furnish information to the Governor as per Article 167 of the Constitution. The Court emphasized the importance of fulfilling constitutional obligations and conducting constitutional discourse with decorum and maturity.
Issues: The issues revolved around the constitutional duties of the Governor and the Chief Minister, the derogatory communication between them, and the inaction of the Governor in summoning the Legislative Assembly for the Budget Session.
Ratio Decidendi: The Governor is duty bound to act on the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers in summoning the Legislative Assembly, and the Chief Minister is obligated to furnish information to the Governor as per Article 167 of the Constitution. Failure to fulfill constitutional obligations does not justify non-compliance with other constitutional obligations. Constitutional discourse must be conducted with decorum and mature statesmanship.
Final Decision: The Court disposed of the petition, emphasizing the fulfillment of constitutional duties by the Governor and the Chief Minister, and the importance of conducting constitutional discourse with decorum and maturity.
JUDGMENT :
Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, CJI.
1. On 22 February 2023, the Council of Ministers of the Government of Punjab recommended the summoning of the Budget Session of the Sixteenth Punjab Vidhan Sabha on 3 March 2023 under Article 174(1) of the Constitution.
2. On 23 February 2023, the Governor of Punjab addressed a communication to the Chief Minister of the State. The subject of the letter was :
3. The letter of the Governor refers to a prior exchange of correspondence between the Governor and the Chief Minister; the Governor having addressed an earlier communication of 13 February 2023 to which the Chief Minister had responded through a letter dated 14 February 2023 and a ’tweet’ of the same date.
4. In his communication of 13 February 2023 to the Chief Minister, the Governor highlighted his concern on certain specific issues, namely :
(ii) The appointment of the Chairman of the Punjab Information and Communication Technology Corporation Limited.
5. The Governor noted that while the Chief Minister had in his previous correspondence underscored the mandate with which he has assumed the office of Chief Minister, in terms of Article 167 of the Constitution, the Chief Minister is bound to furnish full details and information sought by the Governor.
6. Besides the above two issues, the Governor sought a clarification on the following matters :
(b) To remove the illegally appointed Vice Chancellor of PAU vide letter No.5/1/2021-PRB-PAU-2G/6904 dated 23-11-22.
(c) Inspite of my detailed letter dated 14-12-2022 you chose to ignore all misdeeds of Sh. Kuldeep Singh Chahal, IPS. You have not only promoted him but also posted him as Commissioner of Jalandhar and that too the orders being issued just before 26th January, knowing very well that Governor is to unfurl the national flag at Jalandhar. I had to instruct the DGP that concerned officer should maintain distance during ceremony. On this issue it seems that this officer was your blue eyed boy and you chose to ignore facts that were brought to your notice by this office.
(d) Vide letter dated 4-1-2023 I wrote about the presence of Sh. Naval Aggarwal in meetings of senior officers, where sensitive and confidential matters of security of the country are discussed. I have not received any reply till date.
(e) My letters asking for details of advertisements where you were asked for complete details, is also perhaps lying in cold storage.”
7. Responding to the above communication, the Chief Minister (@ Bhagwant Mann) issued a tweet in the following terms :
8. This was followed by another communication of the Chief Minister dated 14 February 2023, in which he stated thus :
Dated:14.02.2023
Honorable Governor Sahib,
I have received your letter No.Spl.Secy.Gov/2023/34 dated 13th February, 2023.
All the subjects mentioned in your letter are the subjects of the state government. In this regard, I would like to clarify that according to the Indian Constitution, I and my government are answerable to 3 crore Punjabis.
You have asked me, on what basis the principals are selected for training in Singapore. The people of Punjab want to ask, on what basis are the Governors in different states elected by the Central Government in the absence of any specific qualification in the Indian Constitution?
Please increase
Shamsher Singh vs. State of Punjab
Nabam Rebia v. Dy. Speaker, Arunachal Pradesh Legislative Assembly
The Governor is not empowered to withhold action on the Bills passed by the State Legislature and must act 'as soon as possible'. The Speaker is legally permissible to reconvene the sitting of the Vi....
The Governor holds discretionary power under Article 200 and is not mandated to adhere to a set timeframe for assenting bills.
Governors can impose rule under discretionary powers for political stability, even if it contradicts council advice, as per the Sixth Schedule of the Constitution.
The Governor must act on the advice of the Council of Ministers under Article 171(5), with judicial review permitted in cases of ultra vires actions or mala fides.
The Governor is bound by the recommendation of the Council of Ministers, but his formal authorization is required for release, as observed in Maru Ram v. Union of India, AIR 1980 SC 2147.
The Governor's nominations under Article 171(5) require adherence to constitutional procedures, with judicial review available for actions deemed ultra vires or in bad faith.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.