Vanshika Bhalla
The Supreme Court on January 6, 2025 continued hearing two writ petitions filed by the State of Tamil Nadu against Governor Dr. RN Ravi for withholding assent to 12 bills passed by the State Assembly. The petitions, being heard by a Bench of Justices J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan, have sparked debates over the constitutional role of the Governor under Article 200 of the Constitution in The State of Tamil Nadu v. The Governor of Tamil Nadu
The Tamil Nadu government, argued that the Governor’s prolonged withholding of assent constitutes a violation of Article 200 of the Constitution of India According to the petitioners, the Governor has three clear options under this Article: to assent to the bill, reserve it for the President’s consideration, or withhold assent by returning the bill to the legislature for reconsideration.
The Governor cannot exercise ‘pocket veto.’ Senior Advocate Rakesh Dwivedi criticized this practice, stating that it is not permissible under Article 200. Justice Pardiwala concurred, emphasizing the Governor’s advisory role and the primacy of the State Legislature.
The hearing also delved into whether the Governor’s discretion to reserve a bill is confined to specific instances, particularly those involving legislative competence or repugnancy to central laws. The petitioners maintained that the Governor is not a “super-legislature” and cannot act as a court of law.
Senior Advocate Dwivedi sought a declaration that the Governor’s reference to the President is unconstitutional and requested the court to either direct the Governor to grant assent or construe assent as deemed to be granted.
The case has far-reaching implications for federalism and the role of Governors in India’s constitutional framework. As the Supreme Court continues to hear arguments, the nation awaits a decisive verdict.
Case Name: The State of Tamil Nadu v. The Governor of Tamil Nadu and Anr. and The State of Tamil Nadu v. The Vice Chancellor and Ors.
Case Number: W.P.(C) No. 1239/2023 and W.P.(C) No. 1271/2023 [notice not issued]
Bench: Justices J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan