British Laws Scrapped, Governors Stay: What Blocks Abolition?

India has repealed or overhauled many British‑era statutes, yet the Governor’s post remains because it is created by the Constitution and cannot be removed by ordinary legislation. Abolition would require a constitutional amendment with special majorities in both Houses of Parliament and, given the federal nature of the office, likely ratification by at least half the states. Meanwhile, courts have curbed open‑ended delays in granting assent to state Bills by insisting on time‑bound decisions and written reasons, to prevent governance paralysis that hurts universities, city services, and public money.

Why The Post Survives Despite The Decolonisation Drive

The reform of colonial‑era laws—such as comprehensive criminal law overhauls—occurred through ordinary statutes. The Governor’s office, however, is entrenched in constitutional text (Articles 153 onward). That legal distinction raises the bar for change. Abolition demands not only supermajorities and state ratification but also a credible replacement framework for essential neutral functions: assent to Bills, reservation of Bills for Presidential consideration, and limited constitutional safeguards during breakdowns of governance. Without a carefully drafted alternative, state law‑making could face a legal vacuum.

Costs At Raj Bhavan And The “Public Vs System” Bill

Raj Bhavans entail recurring expenditure—estates, staff, protocol, travel, and maintenance—costs that draw scrutiny in a developing economy. The larger loss, however, is often indirect. When Bills sit without decision, universities cannot fill leadership posts on time, admissions and accreditation windows slip, and research or faculty hiring pauses. In cities, urban reform and civic authority laws stall, slowing tenders for roads, water, housing, and public health. Revenue Bills wait, squeezing quarterly cash flows and delaying schemes. The effect is a familiar “public vs system” picture: citizens pay first when files do not move.

Pendency And Service‑Delivery Impact

Across states, pending Bills commonly cluster in three areas: higher‑education governance (Vice‑Chancellor selection and Chancellor roles), urban devolution and institutional powers, and state revenues. These are not abstract concerns. A pending statute can block a VC appointment for a semester. A stalled urban law can hold up a water contract or road tender. A delayed tax change can starve departments of funds for health, education, and local development in the current quarter. Movement on such Bills often follows court nudges or strong public documentation of delay.

Courts Curb Indefinite Delays

Courts have made clear there is no “pocket veto” under Article 200; constitutional heads must act “as soon as possible,” now read in practice as defined action windows. These operate as follows in substance: prompt initial action by the Governor; a bounded period with written reasons if deviating from cabinet advice; a short window after the legislature re‑presents a Bill; and a fixed outer limit for decisions when a Bill is reserved for the President. Silence does not become assent—courts will not turn inaction into law—but judges can compel decisions and test delays for reasonableness, reducing governance by pause while preserving checks and balances.

Why Abolition Is Hard—And What Can Change Fast

Even with political will, the amendment hurdle is real: supermajorities in both Houses and broad state ratification. The practical route to immediate relief is process and scope reform:

• Enforce timelines rigorously. Track each Bill’s milestones from Assembly passage to Raj Bhavan and, if applicable, to Rashtrapati Bhavan. Escalate before windows close.
• Put reasons on record. Written grounds for withholding or reservation enable quick corrective drafting and targeted judicial review.
• Prune extra roles. Removing the Governor from university Chancellorships and similar posts where legally permissible cuts friction, speeds appointments, and reduces litigation.
• Professionalise appointments. Transparent criteria and stable tenure norms reduce political churn and administrative lag.
• Keep Raj Bhavans lean. Publish detailed budgets and audits, trim non‑essential protocol, and digitise workflows to conserve funds and accelerate movement.

State‑level patterns and movement

• Tamil Nadu: Litigation and public scrutiny moved multiple pending Bills, revealing how backlogs can choke higher‑education reform and administrative plans.
• Kerala: Delays and reservation on university Bills shifted the legal fight to timelines and recorded reasons, with repercussions for appointments and academic calendars.
• West Bengal and Punjab: Pendency disputes led to court‑nudged movement and subsequent assents, including on finance‑linked measures.
• Karnataka, Telangana, Chhattisgarh and others: Periodic pendency on university, urban, and revenue Bills produced concrete service and budget impacts for residents and departments.

Human Angle: Every Week Matters

A single pending law can hold up a VC appointment and delay an academic cycle. A stalled urban Bill can push a city water project or fleet procurement into the next quarter, raising costs. A paused revenue Bill can shrink funds for primary care, school repairs, and local works now, not later. The people who feel it first are students, parents, small contractors, municipal workers, and patients waiting for upgrades.

How We Got Here

States sought to update university governance to reduce politicisation, energise local bodies, and align revenue laws with current needs. Without hard action windows, returning Bills or reserving them for the President could enable long stalls. Judicial directions introduced structure—timeboxes and reasoned orders—to restore the constitutional expectation that heads of state act swiftly and transparently in a parliamentary system.

What governments can do immediately

• Build a live dashboard: track each Bill’s status, key dates, and next action before the window closes.
• Seek and answer reasons quickly: if a Bill is returned or reservation is indicated, respond with targeted amendments to avoid fresh cycles.
• Prioritise high‑impact Bills: move education and essential‑service items first to minimise public harm if delays occur.
• Publish monthly pendency reports: transparency builds trust and pressure for timely action.
• Prune roles and costs: remove Chancellorships where lawful; audit Raj Bhavan budgets; limit protocol; digitise files for speed and savings.

What citizens can do

• File focused petitions: where delays cause measurable harm—missed semesters, vacant posts, stalled tenders, or delayed revenue—seek directions for decisions within the set windows.
• Use information requests: obtain pendency dates, movement notes, and reasons; share simple public trackers to keep pressure factual and civil.
• Engage calmly: parent bodies, student unions, and RWAs can write to Raj Bhavans and ministries, citing dates, impacts, and timelines requested by law and by recent court guidance.

If abolition remains the goal
A credible path requires substance and consensus:

• Build cross‑party and federal support for an amendment; without it, change will stall.
• Draft the replacement: specify who grants assent, when reservation applies, and how neutrality is preserved; anticipate edge cases to avoid a vacuum.
• Phase reforms: first codify timelines and reasons in statute, prune extra roles, and professionalise appointments so that governance improves even before structural change.

FAQs

Scrapping British‑era statutes was within Parliament’s ordinary powers; changing the Constitution demands a higher plane of agreement and a detailed alternative that preserves federal balance. That is why Governors stay even as many colonial laws go. The quickest relief for people is to make the office work within strict timeboxes, put reasons on record, prune add‑on roles, and keep Raj Bhavans lean—so public money funds services, not silence.