The Kerala government has faced criticism for denying Kerala Governor Arif Mohammed Khan’s requests for clarifications on objections raised against the Kerala Public Health Bill, 2021. Traditional medicine practitioners voiced their concerns, stating that the Bill discriminated against them and interfered with their qualifications and treatment systems. The Bill is one of several awaiting the Governor’s approval. The Kerala government intends to take the matter to the Supreme Court to seek directions for the Governor to act on pending Bills.
However, the government’s move to block the Governor’s actions has caused controversy. A.P.M. Mohammed Hanish, State Principal Secretary (Health and Family Welfare), wrote to Raj Bhavan, expressing reservations about the Governor entertaining such petitions before exhausting the courses of action provided by the Constitution. The government argues that this may establish a detrimental precedent and go against the principles of separation of powers.
The Governor’s role in this matter is crucial. As per the Constitution, he can give his assent, withhold it, or reserve it for the consideration of the President. The State has reminded the Governor that if he chooses to reserve it for Presidential consideration or return it to the Legislature with a message, the necessary actions will be taken in consultation with relevant administrative and law authorities.
The State also invoked Constitutional court judgments, emphasizing that policy decisions of State governments should not be interfered with unless they are deemed grossly arbitrary or irrational. While the State claims that the concerns raised in the petitions are baseless, it acknowledges the right of parties to challenge the legislation once it becomes an Act.
This standoff between the Kerala government and the Governor highlights the complexities of power distribution and decision-making in the Indian political system. It remains to be seen how the Supreme Court will respond to the government’s request for the Governor to act on the pending Bills. The outcome of this case will have significant implications for future interactions between State governments and Governors in the legislative process.
