The Centre has urged the Supreme Court to refer a petition filed by the Punjab government regarding two bills to a five-judge bench. The bills in question involve amendments to the Sikh Gurdwaras Act and the Punjab Police Act. The five-judge bench is already scheduled to hear a Presidential Reference concerning the Supreme Court's jurisdiction to establish timelines for the President and governors in granting, refusing, or withholding assent to bills.
Advocate Kanu Agrawal, representing the Centre, requested a bench led by Chief Justice of India (CJI) B.R. Gavai to either combine the Punjab petition with the Presidential Reference or keep it pending until the five-judge bench issues its opinion on the 14 questions raised by President Droupadi Murmu. These questions were raised following the Supreme Court's April 8 judgment. The bench has scheduled a hearing for the Centre's application on Monday.
The Punjab government has expressed concerns that the bills, passed by the assembly two years prior, have been stalled due to the President, allegedly after the governor arbitrarily referred them to her. The state challenges "the governor's referral of the two bills to the President of India for her consideration in contravention to the aid and advice of the council of ministers in the absence of any constitutional trigger or any extraordinary breakdown of democratic governance". They are also contesting "the President's inaction on both the bills," asserting that, according to the April 8 judgment, the President must provide reasons for refusing or withholding assent.
The Sikh Gurdwaras (Amendment) Bill, 2023, seeks to mandate the board constituted under the Sikh Gurdwaras Act, 1925, to propagate the teachings of the Gurus by making uninterrupted live feeds of the holy Gurbani from Sri Harmandir Sahib available to all media outlets free of charge. It also restricts anyone broadcasting the Holy Gurbani from telecasting any advertisement 30 minutes before and after the broadcast.
The Supreme Court had earlier issued a notice to the Union of India in response to the Punjab Government's plea challenging the Governor's decision to reserve multiple re-passed state bills for the President's consideration. This issue brings to the forefront the complexities of Centre-State relations and questions the constitutional discretion of Governors under Article 200. The Punjab government, led by Chief Minister Bhagwant Mann, approached the apex court after the Governor withheld assent to seven key legislative bills, reserving them for the President, despite the bills having been re-passed by the Punjab Legislative Assembly. The State argued that the Governor's action violated the Constitution, especially since the Supreme Court had already established the law regarding gubernatorial powers in such instances.
A five-judge Constitution Bench, headed by Chief Justice of India B.R. Gavai, and comprising Justices Surya Kant, Vikram Nath, P.S. Narasimha, and A.S. Chandurkar, addressed the matter and issued a formal notice to the Centre to clarify several points: * Whether a Governor can reserve re-passed bills for presidential assent. * Whether such reservation violates the binding precedent laid down in 2023. * What role the Union government plays in monitoring or advising Governors on such constitutional matters.
In July 2025, the Supreme Court addressed Punjab's plea regarding the President's delay in clearing two state bills, issuing a notice to the Centre for further proceedings. The Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) government urged the court to direct the governor to follow the law in the Tamil Nadu case or to deem the bills as passed with "deemed" consent. The court noted that the issue raised in the petition would have to await the outcome of the Presidential reference. The two bills in question include the Punjab Police (Amendment) Bill, 2023, and the Sikh Gurudwaras (Amendment) Bill, 2023.
