The Supreme Court in a landmark judgement has ruled that Governors are only titular, unelected heads of State and they don't have the power to veto legislative actions of elected governments or sit indefinitely on bills duly passed by the legislature.
It is often the case where the party in power at the Centre appoints right leaning Governors in all Opposition ruled States.
This is evident by the situation in Punjab, Tamil Nadu, Kerala, West Bengal, Delhi and other states where these appointees only act as agents of the Centre.
The judgement also made it clear that if the governor withholds assent to a particular bill by the power conferred to him under the substantive part of Article 200 he should mandatorily communicate to the legislature as soon as possible a message warranting reconsideration.
The SC bench headed by the CJI himself opined that unbridled powers to unelected heads of state to withhold bills virtually vetoes the functioning of the legislative domain and by extension the administration of the state.
This is totally in contravention to the fundamental principles of a constitutional democracy. The judgement further states that it is the right of each House of the legislature to be the sole judge of the lawfulness of it's own proceedings so as to be immune from challenge before a court of law.
Hopefully this would have a chastening effect on these partisan political pawns masquerading as Governors.
