The Supreme Court’s reply to the Presidential reference on how the apex court could set a timeline for the president and governors to clear bills has come as a blow to the Opposition-ruled states. The Supreme Court, citing Articles 200 and 201 of the Constitution, refused to impose timelines on governors for acting on bills.
The chief justice of India-led five-judge bench pointed out the phrase “as soon as possible” in Article 200 and said the governors' actions would be open to judicial scrutiny if they refused to act on the bills for a prolonged time in an inexplicable manner. However, the president’s actions on the bills are not open to judicial scrutiny. In short, enacted laws could be subjected to judicial scrutiny, but not the bills.
Analysts held that this decision could affect the bills of Opposition-led states such as West Bengal, Kerala, Tamil Nadu, Karnataka and Telangana. “It’s mostly the bills proposed by the Opposition governments that could be blocked now. You don’t find any state government ruled by the Bharatiya Janata Party or its allies facing this issue. We could see a precursor in Delhi. The Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) could not take its agenda forward as the Delhi lieutenant governor withheld important bills, such as the Mohalla Clinics Bill, and finally, the party lost the elections. Other Opposition parties could face a similar prospect,” said Ajay Gudavarthy, associate professor in political science at the Centre for Political Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi.
Telangana is one of the states that could face an immediate crunch due to the decision. The Revanth Reddy-led Congress government attempted to push 42 per cent BC reservations in local governments, education and employment as a major policy initiative.
On August 31, it passed two key bills — the Telangana Backward Classes, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Reservation of seats in educational institutions and of appointments or posts in services under the state) Bill, 2025, proposing 42 per cent BC reservation in education and state jobs, and the Telangana Backward Classes (Reservation of seats in rural and urban local bodies) Bill, 2025, extending the same quota to rural and urban local bodies.
Also read
- Will your car be impounded? How SC move to allow action against Delhi-NCR's end-of-life vehicles will affect you
- Justice Yashwant Varma moves Supreme Court against Speaker’s impeachment panel, court flags procedural lapse
- Access to justice for common person is hampered by cost, delays: CJI Surya Kant
- When Supreme Court justice took strike: Judges vs lawyers on the cricket pitch
Before the passing of the bills in August, on July 15, the Congress government had attempted to introduce the local-body quota through an ordinance, but the governor referred it to the president as it breached the 50 per cent ceiling. The state later issued a Government Order (GO) to enforce the quota, which was challenged in court. The Telangana High Court stayed the GO for not meeting the Supreme Court’s “triple-test” requirement, and the Supreme Court declined to interfere with that stay. This verdict has effectively ended the legislation route for the increased BC reservations in Telangana.
"The Telangana government can now forget the BC reservation bills. It may have to explore the internal quota option for the BC leaders in the local polls. This measure could save its face and if other don’t follow it, they would be fault. However, this issue goes beyond these two bills. The unlimited power bestowed upon governors and the president undermines the elected state governments,” said Telakapalli Ravi, a senior political commentator in Hyderabad. Going forward, elected governments will have to lobby with governors and the Centre even before proposing major bills, he added.
