The Congress is confident the Governor would give assent to the bill and believes that it would not be forced to approach the Supreme Court like Tamil Nadu.
Published Apr 11, 2025 | 9:39 AM ⚊ Updated Apr 11, 2025 | 9:39 AM
Governor of Karnataka Thawar Chand Gehlot with Siddaramaiah and DK Shivakumar. (Supplied)
Synopsis: Congress in Karnataka are confident that Governor Thawar Chand Gehlot would give assent to the pending bills, including the GBG Bill and KTPP bill. They believe there will be no need for the state government to take legal action over the passage of the bills.
After the Supreme Court told the Tamil Nadu government to act by the policies of the state government, the Congress in Karnataka is confident that state Governor Thawar Chand Gehlot would give assent to the bills passed by the state Assembly.
The state Assembly passed the Greater Bengaluru Governance (GBG) Bill on 10 March and the Karnataka Transparency in Public Procurement (KTTP) Bill on 21 March and sent them to the Governor for his assent.
When these bills were passed, MLAs and MLCs of the BJP and the JD(S) opposed them and submitted a memorandum to the Governor requesting him not to give assent to the bills, citing violation of 74th CAA in GBG Bill and termed KTTP Bill unconstitutional.
In the KTPP bill, the government amended the existing Act to provide four percent reservation for Muslims in public contract works under the socially and educationally backward category.
The Congress is confident the Governor would give assent to the bill and believes that it would not be forced to approach the Supreme Court like Tamil Nadu.
On 8 April, the Supreme Court ruled that Tamil Nadu Governor RN Ravi’s conduct regarding 10 bills re-passed by the state assembly was unconstitutional.
The Supreme Court said that the 10 bills should have been given assent and gave Governors a time limit of one to three months to decide on bills.
It stated that Governors do not have a pocket veto. The apex court had pointed out that, according to Article 200 of the Indian Constitution, a Governor can either give Assent to the bill, withhold the bill or Reserve the bill for the consideration of the president.
Congress MLA Rizwan Arshad, who headed the Joint Legislative Review Committee of the GBG Bill told South First that the Karnataka Governor was not like the Governor of Tamil Nadu or any other states.
“He will ascertain the facts and give assent to the bill. The Supreme Court has clearly established the process of the Governor granting assent to bills so that the government can create laws. If at all he needs any clarifications, the government can address those concerns and resend them. He can refer it to the President only if there is a violation of the Constitution. These bills don’t violate the Constitution. Therefore, he is duty-bound to give assent. If he is not giving assent due to political reasons, that is where the Supreme Court steps in,” Arshad said.
However, it was not only the opposition party that criticised the GBG Bill, a citizens group named Bengaluru Town Hall Forum submitted a letter to the Governor requesting him not to give assent, citing the violation of the 74th Constitutional Amendment Act (CAA). They said the bill weakens citizen participation in the ward committees, violation of Article 14 and others.
Following the concerns, Governor returned the bill to the state government on 26 March asking for clarification and also address the concerns of citizens.
Arshad said that the Government resubmitted the bill to the Governor on 9 April after addressing the concerns of citizens.
“We have provided necessary clarifications, addressed concerns of citizens and submitted the copy of the Bill to the Governor on 9 April. Now it is upon him to examine and give the assent to the bill. I am confident that he would give assent to the bill because the GBG bill is sound in terms of constitutionality. He should approve it.”
He added, “I have seen the copy of objections raised against GBG. They are not legal. The objections should point to the violations of the Constitution. Some might say the bill is useful while others might not. Political parties might have different views the way administrative structure should be set up.”
When asked about the KTPP bill which aims to provide four percent reservation to Muslims under socially and educationally backward classes, he said, “Yes, he should give assent to that bill also. Because the bill was prepared after considering observations made by different backward class commissions that recognised socially and educationally backward communities. This was also upheld by various courts in the past. The four percent reservation in public works is not religion-based.”
Meanwhile, Karnataka Revenue Minister Krishna Byre Gowda told South First, “There have been back-and-forth communications between the Government and Raj Bhavan. Similarly, the bills moved back and forth. Most of the bills have been cleared. There has been some above-normal scrutiny from the Raj Bhavan. However, we have made progress. I wouldn’t call it over-activism, but there has certainly been some assertive activity from Karnataka. At the end of the day, despite such differences, we can move forward. At this stage, we are not exploring an option of moving the court.”
Pointing to the the case against Tamil Nadu Governor, he said that the Supreme Court ruling has set a benchmark in the conduct of Governors or Raj Bhavan.
“With the new Supreme Court ruling, I hope we will not be compelled to resort to legal measures for clearing bills. I hope that it settles the recent behaviour of Governors in Karnataka, Kerala, Tamil Nadu, West Bengal, Punjab and other states ruled by Opposition parties. Raj Bhavan must take the guidance of the Supreme Court ruling and act accordingly. I hope it will resolve the delays in passing the bills,” he added.
Karnataka Chief Minister Siddaramaiah also believes that the Supreme Court verdict is a direct message to all state Governors.
He wrote on X, “The Supreme Court’s verdict striking down the unilateral actions of Tamil Nadu Governor RN Ravi — who had been acting in blatant violation of the spirit of the Constitution — is a strong warning to all Governors in the country and to the BJP-led Union Government under Narendra Modi, which continues to manipulate institutions from behind the curtain.”
He added, “By clearly defining the limits and duties of a Governor’s role, the Supreme Court has brought much-needed clarity to a long-standing constitutional ambiguity. It has set a clear timeline—no more than three months—for the President’s assent on Bills passed by the State Legislature, thus ending the practice of indefinite delays used to undermine state governments.”
However, contrary to the above mentioned opinions, Karnataka Information Technology and Biotechnology Minister Priyank Kharge mentioned last week that the government would be compelled to go to the Supreme Court just like Tamil Nadu if the Governor delayed the passing of bills.
He said, “Karnataka Government has also faced situations similar to Tamil Nadu and Kerala in getting Governor’s assent to bills. We would give necessary clarifications to him and if he is still not convinced, the state government would approach the Supreme Court.”
(Edited by Muhammed Fazil.)
