SG: as a matter of fact that Article 213, that despite the contrary aid and advice, the Governor has room for discretion. I have given contingency for discretion. I have cited judgments which says irrespective of constitutional provisions, there is discretion available- calling for the chief minister to make government etc. ..i have given broad paramaters such as bill is undermining the constitution, erodes principles of democracy, has a character which has national implication. I have example of Punjab water dispute, 4 States involved, an international agreement, assent was given

J Narasimha: court granted stay on that

SG: but that would not take away the power of governor to withhold. I have given extreme examples, I have given judgments where Supreme Court has given extreme examples to decide the case. The Constitution will have to be interpreted with harshest example to withstand the time. I have given example of Nani Phalkhiwala giving extreme examples- surrendering sovereignty, or state saying we will not tax anyone except industrialists.

See Kesavananda Bharati-

CJI: these are in regards to executive having unbridled powers. Your submission is that while interpretating this, we have to take into consideration extreme situation

SG: Another example State of Rajasthan v UOI- this was came of A. 365, Janata Government dismissed 7 Congress Government- question was what can be judicial review- court said we will examine only if there are certain exceptional examples

J Narasimha: this is age-old technique, nothing new.