The exercise of legislative powers by a Governor is generally subject to certain essential conditions. These conditions vary depending on the specific constitutional provisions of each country or state. However, some common essential conditions include:

1. Constitutional Authority: The Governor must have constitutional authority to exercise legislative powers. This authority is typically provided in the constitution or legislative acts, which define the scope and extent of the Governor's legislative powers.

2. Legislative Function: The Governor's exercise of legislative powers should be limited to specific situations where legislation is required. Generally, the primary function of the Governor is to execute the laws enacted by the legislature, rather than create new laws.

3. Exigency or Urgency: The exercise of legislative powers by the Governor is often reserved for situations of exigency or urgency. This means that the Governor's power to enact laws through ordinances or similar means is typically limited to instances where waiting for the regular legislative process would result in detrimental consequences.

4. Temporary in Nature: The legislative acts of a Governor, such as ordinances, are usually temporary and intended for a limited duration. They are meant to provide a temporary solution until the regular legislature can convene and pass permanent legislation.

Regarding the legality of re-promulgation of ordinances without placing them before the legislature, it depends on the constitutional framework and laws of the specific country or state. In some jurisdictions, re-promulgation without placing the ordinance before the legislature is considered unconstitutional and could be struck down by the judiciary.

The rationale behind requiring placement before the legislature is to ensure transparency, accountability, and the principle of separation of powers. Placing ordinances before the legislature allows for their proper scrutiny and debate among elected representatives, ensuring that the legislative power is exercised in a democratic and participatory manner.

However, in some cases, the constitution may explicitly allow for re-promulgation without placing ordinances before the legislature. This can be justified on grounds of necessity and urgency. Nevertheless, even in such cases, there may be limitations on the number of times an ordinance can be re-promulgated, or a requirement to obtain the legislature's approval after a certain period.

Overall, the legality of re-promulgation without placing ordinances before the legislature depends on the specific constitutional provisions and laws of the particular jurisdiction.

Essential Conditions for Exercise of Legislative Powers by the Governor

The extent of a Governor's legislative powers varies significantly based on the specific constitutional framework of each state or territory. Generally, these powers are limited and usually exercised in conjunction with the legislative body. Here's a breakdown of the essential conditions:

1. Emergency Situations: Most constitutions allow Governors to enact emergency ordinances or decrees when the legislature is not in session. This is typically restricted to situations of imminent danger or public crisis. Key factors include:

• Imminent Threat: The situation must be a genuine emergency posing a clear and present threat to public safety or well-being.
• Limited Scope: Emergency ordinances are intended to address the immediate crisis and should not cover broader policy areas.
• Time Limit: The ordinances usually have a limited duration and expire automatically when the legislature reconvenes or after a predetermined period.

2. Legislative Consent: Governors often require legislative consent for certain actions, even if not explicitly mandated by the constitution. This might include:

• Approving Bills: The Governor may have the power to approve or veto bills passed by the legislature. This is a crucial aspect of the legislative process and ensures checks and balances.
• Calling Special Sessions: The Governor may convene the legislature for special sessions to address specific issues. However, the legislature's agenda is usually controlled by the legislative leadership.

3. Constitutional Framework: The specific limitations and conditions governing the Governor's legislative powers are laid out in the state or territory's constitution. These are crucial for understanding the legal boundaries of the Governor's actions.

4. Judicial Review: The judiciary has the power to review the Governor's actions, including emergency ordinances, to ensure they align with the constitution and applicable laws. This provides a safeguard against abuse of power.

Legality of Repromulgation of Ordinances by the Governor

Repromulgating an ordinance without placing it before the legislature is a complex issue with no universal answer. It largely depends on the specific constitutional framework and judicial precedent of the jurisdiction.

Arguments against Repromulgation:

• Separation of Powers: Repromulgation without legislative approval might violate the principle of separation of powers by allowing the Governor to circumvent the legislature's role in lawmaking.
• Lack of Legitimacy: The ordinance was already rejected by the legislature, implying a lack of legislative support. Repromulgation without addressing the concerns raised by the legislature can be seen as undemocratic.
• Violation of Procedural Requirements: The constitution might require certain procedures for enacting legislation, including legislative approval, which repromulgation bypasses.

Arguments in Favor of Repromulgation:

• Emergency Circumstances: If the situation warrants immediate action, the Governor might argue that repromulgation is necessary to address an urgent public need.
• Continuity of Government: Repromulgation might be used to ensure continuity of existing regulations while the legislature is not in session, especially if the ordinance addresses crucial issues.

Ultimately, the legality of repromulgation depends on the specific constitutional provisions and case law in the jurisdiction. In the absence of clear constitutional guidance, courts would likely look at the following factors:

• Nature of the ordinance: The more significant the impact of the ordinance on public policy or individual rights, the more likely the courts are to view repromulgation as problematic.
• Legislature's role: Courts would consider whether the legislature has expressed its opposition to the ordinance and the reasons for its disapproval.
• Emergency circumstances: Courts would evaluate the urgency of the situation and whether repromulgation is justified considering the circumstances.

In conclusion, while Governors may have limited legislative powers in emergency situations, the legality of repromulgating ordinances without legislative approval is highly contested. The final judgment on the issue rests with the courts, which will analyze the specific constitutional framework, legislative context, and the circumstances surrounding the action.

The essential conditions for the exercise of legislative powers by the Governor are as follows:

1. Emergency Situation: The Governor can exercise legislative powers only in an emergency situation where it is not possible to convene the Legislature or where immediate action is required.
2. Concurrence of the Council of Ministers: The Governor must have the concurrence of the Council of Ministers before exercising legislative powers.
3. Limited to Specific Circumstances: The Governor's legislative powers are limited to specific circumstances, such as natural disasters, war, or financial crisis, and cannot be exercised in normal circumstances.
4. Non-Infringement of Fundamental Rights: The Governor's exercise of legislative powers must not infringe upon the Fundamental Rights enshrined in Part III of the Constitution.
5. Compliance with Constitutional Provisions: The Governor's exercise of legislative powers must comply with the provisions of the Constitution, including the principles of federalism and the separation of powers.

Regarding the legality of re-promulgation of ordinances by the Governor without placing them before the Legislature, the Supreme Court has held that re-promulgation of ordinances without placing them before the Legislature is constitutionally invalid.

In the landmark case of D.C. Wadhwa vs. State of Bihar (1987), the Supreme Court ruled that the Governor's power to promulgate ordinances is subject to the condition that they must be laid before the Legislature at its next session. The Court held that the Governor's power to re-promulgate ordinances without placing them before the Legislature is an abuse of power and violative of Article 213 of the Constitution.

The Court observed that the purpose of Article 213 is to ensure that the Governor's Ordinance-making power is not used to bypass the Legislature, and that the Ordinances are subject to legislative scrutiny. By re-promulgating ordinances without placing them before the Legislature, the Governor would be usurping the legislative power, which is contrary to the constitutional scheme.

Therefore, the legality of re-promulgation of ordinances by the Governor without placing them before the Legislature is a constitutional no-go. The Governor must place the Ordinances before the Legislature at its next session, and if the Legislature fails to approve the Ordinance, it will cease to operate.