New Delhi: In a landmark judgment, the Supreme Court of India has categorically declared that the Tamil Nadu Governor RN Ravi’s decision to withhold assent to ten key Bills was “illegal” and “arbitrary.” This ruling marks a significant victory not only for the Tamil Nadu government but also for state governments across India, as it clearly defines the constitutional boundaries within which Governors must operate. Chief Minister MK Stalin hailed the decision as a historic judgment, underscoring its implications for federal governance.
The Supreme Court’s verdict was a stern rebuke of Governor Ravi’s actions, emphasizing that a Governor cannot reserve Bills for the President after initially withholding assent. The bench, comprising Justices JB Pardiwala and R Mahadevan, made it clear that once re-passed by the state assembly, a bill cannot be withheld again by the Governor. Instead, it must either receive assent or be returned for reconsideration within stipulated timelines. The Court ruled that the ten Bills in question should be deemed to have received the Governor’s assent from the date they were re-submitted following re-passage by the Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly.
The court’s decision highlighted that Governor Ravi did not act in “good faith,” leading to an impasse that could have been avoided through timely communication about the Bills’ repugnance to central laws. The verdict established important timelines for Governors to act on Bills: a maximum of one month to withhold assent and reserve for the President with the aid of council of ministers, and three months if acting without such advice.
Chief Minister Stalin addressed the Tamil Nadu Assembly, praising the judgment as a victory for state governments nationwide. He emphasized the significance of this ruling, which strengthens the democratic checks on gubernatorial powers and ensures that the will of elected legislatures is respected.
