Part VI: The States

Chapter IV - Legislative Power of the Governor

Article 213: Power of Governor to promulgate Ordinances

--- Original Article ---

(1) The Governor may promulgate ordinances during recess of the Legislature if immediate legislative action is required, with certain restrictions requiring Presidential instructions.

(2) Ordinances have legislative power but lapse six weeks after reassembly unless approved by the Legislature.

(3) Invalidity applies to unconstitutional provisions within ordinances unless supported by Presidential instructions.

Explanation

Article 213 empowers the Governor to address urgent legislative needs when the Legislature is not in session. However, the ordinance power must not replace legislative authority, ensuring democratic governance.

1. Conditions for Ordinance Promulgation

The Governor can issue an ordinance when the legislature is not in session and only in situations of immediate urgency. Certain cases require prior Presidential approval to ensure constitutional alignment.

2. Temporary Nature of Ordinances

Ordinances are temporary measures with the same power as laws but must be approved by the legislature within six weeks of reassembly. Otherwise, they lapse.

Real-Life Examples

• During the Kerala floods of 2018, the Governor promulgated ordinances to facilitate emergency relief measures, showcasing the utility of Article 213.
• Ordinances in Maharashtra addressed gaps in healthcare funding during the pandemic, later debated in the State Legislature for ratification.

Historical Significance

Rooted in colonial provisions, Article 213 evolved to provide states with a responsive tool for urgent governance needs while ensuring oversight through legislative review.

Legislative History

Article 213, originally Draft Article 187, was debated extensively in the Constituent Assembly, balancing urgency with democratic oversight. Amendments were rejected to retain its flexibility.

Debates

During Constituent Assembly debates, members like Pandit Hirday Nath Kunzru proposed reducing ordinance duration, but this was rejected to maintain balance between executive power and legislative scrutiny.

Prof. Shibban Lal Saksena suggested centralizing ordinance-making power with the President for national oversight. This was also rejected to retain state autonomy.

References

• The Constitution of India - Article 213
• Case Law: State of Kerala v. Union of India
• Constituent Assembly Debates, 1949