Supreme Court ruling restricts Governor's power in legislative process

Governor Banwarilal Purohit did not endorse many of the 27 bills that the Punjab Government enacted in the Legislative Assembly and sent for the governor's assent.
The state government of Punjab then petitioned the Supreme Court to stop the governor's actions. A bench consisting of Justices Pardiwala, Manoj Misra, and Chief Justice Chandrachud heard the plea. “ We must remember that governors are not chosen to serve as the people's spokesmen”, the judges observed and expressed concern over the governors' and state governments' confrontational tactics.
Yesterday saw the whole disclosure of the Supreme Court's ruling's details. The judges in that ruling stated that the legislative process would be derailed if the governor blocked a law that the elected legislature had enacted. The Supreme Court further ruled that it is against the fundamental tenets of constitutional democracy, which support the parliamentary form of government, to suspend an elected legislature by just announcing that approval has been with held without  any reason.
In a parliamentary democracy, the real power rests with the people's representatives. The Governor is only a symbolic leader. As an unelected head of state, the Governor is vested with certain constitutional powers. However this power cannot be used to prevent the regular course of legislation.The Supreme Court has made it clear that in a parliamentary democracy the real power rests with representatives elected by the people and the Governor is an unelected head.
This Supreme Court ruling is perceived as providing a "check" on the governor in the context of disagreements between the state government and the governors regarding the assent of the bills.