Karnataka Government Re-Sends Six Bills to Governor Gehlot for Approval: A Tug-of-War Over Legislative Control

A Persistent Legislative Standoff

On May 14, 2025, the Karnataka government, led by Chief Minister Siddaramaiah, re-sent six crucial bills to Governor Thaawarchand Gehlot for approval, reigniting a contentious battle between the state’s Congress-led administration and the gubernatorial office. These bills, previously returned by the Governor citing the need for clarifications, cover a range of critical areas, including university governance, urban development, public service regulations, cooperative societies, and cultural initiatives. The re-submission comes amid escalating tensions, with the Congress accusing Gehlot of deliberately stalling legislative progress, while the Governor insists on ensuring constitutional compliance. This blog delves into the details of the bills, the reasons behind their return, the political dynamics at play, and the broader implications for Karnataka’s governance and development.

The Bills in Focus: A Diverse Legislative Agenda

The six bills re-sent to Raj Bhavan reflect the Karnataka government’s ambitious agenda to reform governance, enhance urban planning, and strengthen cooperative frameworks. Each bill addresses distinct priorities, but their collective return by the Governor has sparked a debate over the balance of power between the state’s elected government and the constitutional office of the Governor. Below is a detailed look at the legislation in question:

1. Karnataka State Rural Development and Panchayat Raj University (Amendment) Bill

Passed in December 2024, this bill is among the most contentious of the six. It seeks to replace the Governor with the Chief Minister as the chancellor of the Karnataka State Rural Development and Panchayat Raj University, thereby transferring the authority to appoint the university’s vice-chancellor from the Governor to the state government. The amendment aims to align the university’s governance with the state’s policy priorities, emphasizing local accountability in rural development education. Governor Gehlot returned the bill in February 2025, citing concerns over the curtailment of his constitutional powers and the potential politicization of academic appointments. The government, in its re-submission, has reportedly provided detailed clarifications, arguing that the change enhances administrative efficiency and reflects the democratic mandate of the elected government.

2. Karnataka Public Service Commission (Conduct of Business and Additional Functions) (Amendment) Bill

Approved during the budget session in March 2025, this bill proposes to eliminate the requirement for the state government to consult the Karnataka Public Service Commission (KPSC) while framing certain service-related rules. By expanding the executive’s autonomy in matters of recruitment and service conditions, the amendment seeks to streamline administrative processes and reduce bureaucratic delays. The Governor returned the bill, expressing apprehensions about the erosion of the KPSC’s role as an independent constitutional body tasked with ensuring fair recruitment. The state government’s resubmission includes justifications emphasizing the need for flexibility in governance, while assuring that the KPSC’s core functions remain intact.

3. Mysore Urban Development Authority (MUDA) Bill

This legislation aims to establish the Mysore Urban Development Authority, modeled on the Bengaluru Development Authority (BDA), to oversee planned urban growth in Mysuru. The bill, passed in July 2024, addresses the city’s rapid urbanization by creating a dedicated body to manage infrastructure, housing, and land use. Governor Gehlot returned the bill, seeking clarity on its financial implications and administrative structure. The government’s re-submission highlights Mysuru’s growing economic significance and the urgent need for a robust urban planning framework, arguing that the MUDA will drive sustainable development in the region.

4. Gadag-Betageri Business, Culture and Exhibition Authority Bill

Also passed in July 2024, this bill proposes the creation of an authority to promote business, cultural activities, and exhibitions in Gadag-Betageri, a region known for its historical and economic potential. The authority aims to boost tourism, support local industries, and preserve cultural heritage through organized events and infrastructure development. The Governor returned the bill, citing concerns over its funding model and overlap with existing bodies. The state government has responded by clarifying the authority’s unique mandate and outlining its economic benefits for North Karnataka.

5. Karnataka Cooperative Societies (Amendment) Bill

This bill, passed in July 2024, seeks to modernize the state’s cooperative sector by introducing reforms to enhance transparency, accountability, and financial stability in cooperative societies. Key provisions include stricter auditing mechanisms and measures to prevent mismanagement. The Governor returned the bill in February 2025, noting that the clarifications provided by the government were insufficient and raising concerns about potential conflicts with existing cooperative laws. The re-submitted bill includes detailed responses to these concerns, emphasizing the need to strengthen cooperatives as a pillar of Karnataka’s rural economy.

6. Karnataka Souharda Sahakari (Amendment) Bill

Complementing the Cooperative Societies Bill, this legislation, also passed in July 2024, focuses on the Souharda cooperative model, which emphasizes member-driven governance and financial independence. The amendments aim to streamline operations and enhance the competitiveness of Souharda cooperatives. The Governor’s return of the bill cited similar concerns about legal clarity and implementation challenges. The government’s re-submission underscores the Souharda model’s success in Karnataka and its potential to empower rural communities through cooperative enterprises.

The Governor’s Role: A Constitutional Conundrum

Governor Thaawarchand Gehlot’s repeated return of bills has fueled accusations from the Congress government that he is obstructing the state’s legislative agenda. Since August 2024, Gehlot has returned 11 bills, including the six re-sent on May 14, prompting the ruling party to label his actions as “unconstitutional” and “undemocratic.” The Congress argues that the Governor’s insistence on clarifications is a pretext to delay or derail policies that align with the state’s developmental goals. Chief Minister Siddaramaiah has publicly criticized Gehlot, particularly over the university amendment bill, accusing him of overstepping his constitutional role to protect political interests aligned with the opposition Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).

Under Article 200 of the Indian Constitution, a Governor has three options when presented with a bill: grant assent, withhold assent and return the bill with a message, or reserve the bill for the President’s consideration. Gehlot has primarily chosen the second option, returning bills with requests for clarifications, which he argues is within his constitutional prerogative to ensure legislative clarity and compliance. His supporters, including some BJP leaders, defend his actions, asserting that the Governor is safeguarding the Constitution by scrutinizing bills that could have far-reaching implications for governance and public interest.

The Supreme Court’s recent rulings on gubernatorial powers, particularly in the case of Tamil Nadu Governor RN Ravi in April 2025, provide context for this standoff. The Court declared that a Governor’s decision to reserve bills for Presidential assent after withholding approval is “erroneous” and constitutes an impermissible “pocket veto.” It mandated that Governors act within one month when withholding assent or reserving a bill, extending to three months if their decision contradicts the state government’s advice. While Gehlot has not reserved the six Karnataka bills for Presidential assent, the Court’s emphasis on timely action underscores the need for Governors to avoid indefinite delays, a concern echoed by the Karnataka government.

Political Dynamics: Congress vs. BJP

The tussle over the bills is deeply rooted in Karnataka’s polarized political landscape. The Congress, which came to power in May 2023, has faced repeated challenges from Governor Gehlot, appointed by the BJP-led central government. The ruling party views the Governor’s actions as part of a broader strategy by the BJP to undermine its governance, particularly after Gehlot sanctioned an investigation into Siddaramaiah in August 2024 over an alleged site allotment scam. The Congress has rallied behind the Chief Minister, with Deputy Chief Minister DK Shivakumar asserting that the government stands “solidly” by Siddaramaiah and condemning the Governor’s interventions as politically motivated.

The BJP, in turn, has accused the Congress of pushing contentious legislation to consolidate power, particularly through the university amendment bill, which it claims risks politicizing academia. BJP leaders have praised Gehlot’s diligence, arguing that his scrutiny ensures transparency and accountability. The opposition has also capitalized on the Governor’s returns to criticize the Congress for alleged administrative lapses, pointing to the need for clarifications as evidence of poorly drafted bills.

Public sentiment, as reflected on social media platforms like X, is divided. Some users support the Congress’s push for legislative autonomy, with posts arguing that “the Governor is stalling Karnataka’s progress for political reasons.” Others back Gehlot, with comments like “The Governor is right to demand clarity; Congress can’t rush through laws without checks.” The debate underscores the broader tension between state and central authority, a recurring theme in India’s federal structure.

Historical Context: A Pattern of Returns

The re-submission of the six bills is not an isolated incident but part of a pattern of friction between the Karnataka government and Governor Gehlot. In September 2024, Gehlot granted assent to three of 11 bills he had previously returned, including measures to prevent corruption in public examinations and establish a temple development authority. However, his return of other bills, such as the Karnataka Hindu Religious Institutions and Charitable Endowments (Amendment) Bill in March 2024 and the Karnataka (Mineral Rights and Mineral Bearing Land) Tax Bill in January 2025, has drawn criticism from the Congress for delaying key reforms.

The Governor’s return of the Cooperative Societies and Souharda Sahakari bills in February 2025, citing unsatisfactory clarifications, further escalated tensions. His referral of the 4% Muslim quota bill for Presidential assent in April 2025, citing constitutional concerns, highlighted his willingness to challenge the government on sensitive issues. These actions have fueled perceptions that Gehlot is adopting a proactive role in scrutinizing legislation, a stance that contrasts with the Congress’s expectation of swift gubernatorial assent.

Implications for Karnataka’s Governance

The standoff over the six bills has significant implications for Karnataka’s governance and development:

• University Governance: The university amendment bill, if approved, would shift control over vice-chancellor appointments to the Chief Minister, potentially streamlining academic administration but raising concerns about political interference. Its rejection or further delay could hamper the Karnataka State Rural Development and Panchayat Raj University’s ability to align with the state’s rural development goals.
• Public Service Reforms: The KPSC amendment bill aims to enhance executive efficiency in recruitment but risks weakening the commission’s independence. Its outcome will shape Karnataka’s approach to public service governance, a critical area given the state’s large bureaucratic machinery.
• Urban Development: The MUDA bill is pivotal for Mysuru’s growth as a cultural and economic hub. Delays in its approval could stall infrastructure projects, impacting tourism and investment in the region.
• Cooperative Sector: The cooperative and Souharda bills are essential for strengthening Karnataka’s rural economy, where cooperatives play a vital role. Their implementation could empower farmers and small entrepreneurs, but prolonged delays risk undermining confidence in the sector.
• Cultural and Economic Growth: The Gadag-Betageri bill seeks to harness the region’s potential as a cultural and business destination. Its approval would boost North Karnataka’s visibility, but further returns could hinder local development efforts.

Broader Federal Implications

The Karnataka case reflects a broader trend of friction between state governments and Governors in India, particularly in states ruled by opposition parties. Similar disputes have emerged in Tamil Nadu, Kerala, and West Bengal, where Governors have been accused of acting as proxies for the central government. The Supreme Court’s April 2025 ruling on Tamil Nadu’s Governor provides a legal framework to address such conflicts, emphasizing timely gubernatorial action and limiting the scope for arbitrary delays. Karnataka’s Congress government may draw on this precedent to challenge Gehlot’s actions if the bills are returned again or reserved for Presidential assent.

The standoff also raises questions about the role of Governors in India’s federal structure. While the Constitution grants Governors discretionary powers, their exercise in opposition-ruled states often sparks accusations of partisan overreach. The Karnataka government’s decision to re-send the bills with clarifications signals its determination to assert legislative authority, but the outcome will depend on Gehlot’s response and potential legal recourse.

Looking Ahead: A Test of Political Will

As of May 14, 2025, the six bills await Governor Gehlot’s decision, with the Karnataka government hopeful that its clarifications will secure assent. The Congress has signaled its readiness to escalate the matter, with senior leaders hinting at legal action or public mobilization if the bills are further delayed. Chief Minister Siddaramaiah, addressing the media, emphasized the government’s commitment to the bills, stating, “We have addressed all concerns raised by the Governor. These bills are crucial for Karnataka’s progress, and we expect timely approval.”

The Governor, for his part, has maintained a measured stance, with Raj Bhavan sources indicating that Gehlot will review the clarifications thoroughly. His recent assent to the Greater Bengaluru Governance Bill in 2024 suggests a willingness to approve legislation when satisfied with its merits, but his returns of other bills underscore his cautious approach. The possibility of reserving contentious bills, such as the university amendment, for Presidential assent remains a concern for the Congress, given the central government’s BJP affiliation.

For Karnataka’s citizens, the standoff is more than a political drama—it’s a question of governance. The bills address pressing needs, from urban planning in Mysuru to cooperative reforms in rural areas, and their implementation could shape the state’s trajectory. Delays risk stalling development, while approval could bolster the Congress’s credentials ahead of future elections. The opposition BJP, meanwhile, will closely monitor the situation, using any missteps to critique the government’s legislative competence.

Sponsored
FACTS Transcripts
Apply for a University document anywhere
https://www.factstranscript.com
Quick Transcripts for popular Universities, check your University name now and get started. We help you to get your transcript application online which is accepted for use of IRCC.
No DD, NO Paperwork. 100% Authentic, Reliable.
‎FACTS Transcripts Charges · ‎Reviews · ‎Assam Universities · ‎Home · ‎Know your University