"Under the Constitution, he (Governor) has not got so much of powers. He has limited powers which should be used in a fair manner, so that democracy survives," a five-judge Constitution bench headed by Justice J S Khehar said while examining Governor's powers, an issue that has arisen in the wake of the political crisis in Arunachal Pradesh.
Observing that the Governor "has no business to call the assembly session on his whims to test the majority of a Chief Minister and his government", the apex court asked "does it not amount to interfering with the legislative functioning of the House."
The bench posed several questions during the hearing of a batch of petitions filed by various Congress leaders challenging the advancement of the assembly session by Governor J P Rajkhowa, when a lawyer of some rebel Congress MLAs justified the actions of the Governor.
Senior advocate Rakesh Dwivedi, the counsel for rebels, said the Governor, being the administrative head, in his "wisdom thought that this (summoning of the House and subsequent business) may be one of the solutions".
Also Read
The bench, which also comprised Justices Dipak Misra, M B Lokur, P C Ghose and N V Ramana, observed that the right of the Governor under Article 175 (right of the Governor to address and send messages to the House and Houses) of the Constitution was limited.
"There is a problem. Messaging, he can do independently but the nature of messages is important. He needs to take the aid and advise of the Chief Minister and his council of ministers," the bench said, adding, "how far he (Governor) can act, is limited."
The bench perused the dispatch register and, with the
assistance of senior advocate Kapil Sibal, asked some queries to the official and later left the matter for the contesting parties to raise objections, if any.
Dwivedi, in his arguments, said the Governor's decision to summon the assembly session was the only "possible solution" in this "evil situation" as the Speaker was under clout.
"Let us not go by the evil. There is a sword of democracy, you will have to go by that," the bench remarked.
"Why was the session called for only three days? What would have happened, if the assembly proceedings would have taken place on pre-scheduled January 14, instead of December 16, 2015," it said.
"What was the tearing hurry? You could have said that do not change the constitution of the House till January 14, the bench added.
The bench posed the query when Dwivedi said that there were serious corruption charges against then Speaker Nabam Rebia and the Governor was empowered under the Constitution to advance the assembly session and instruct that the issue of removal of the Speaker be taken up as first item of business.
It appeared that the Governor tried to "interfere with the functioning of the House" as he advanced the session, which was earlier decided on the aid and advise of the Chief Minister and his council of ministers.
"Suddenly, one day, he (Governor) says that he does not require any advise and advanced the assembly session and that to, for three days only," it added.
The court, which is hearing a batch of pleas on certain powers of the Governor under the Constitution, would resume hearing tomorrow.