Explained: Why SC verdict against Tamil Nadu Governor Ravi a big win for Stalin, opposition-ruled states?

The Supreme Court on Tuesday came down heavily on Tamil Nadu governor R.N.Ravi and said the reservation of 10 bills by him for consideration by the president was in contravention of constitutional provisions.

A bench of Justices comprising J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan said that under Article 200 of the Constitution, the governor does not possess any direction and has to mandatorily act on the aid and advice of the council of ministers. Article 200 deals with the assent to bills. 

The bench also ruled that the governor cannot withhold assent and adopt the concept of absolute veto or pocket veto. It said that the governor is obligated to adopt one course of action in approving the bills passed in the state assembly – either give assent to bills or withhold assent, and reserve for consideration of the president.  “Governor did not act bona fide, the bills were deemed to have been assented to by the governor on the date when they were re-presented,” observed Justice Pardiwala.

The apex court used powers under Article 142 of the Constitution and made all 10 bills effective from the date they were re-presented for the governor’s consideration. “The reservation of the 10 bills by the governor and reference to the president on November 28, 2023, even after reconsideration by the State Legislative Assembly of Tamil Nadu, is contrary to Article 200 of the Constitution. The governor’s action was non est and erroneous in law. Consequently, the action taken by the president on the 10 Bills is also non est,” the Supreme Court said.

Tamil Nadu and the bills

In Tamil Nadu, the state government and the governor have been at loggerheads since Ravi took charge in 2021.

Tamil Nadu had approached the Supreme Court soon after the governor chose to sit on the bill dealing with the appointment of vice-chancellors in the state universities. A total of 10 bills were sent by the state legislature for consent to the governor as per Article 200 of the Constitution. These bills were passed in the assembly between January 2020 and April 2023. Immediately after the state government approached the Supreme Court in November 2023, Governor Ravi, out of the 12 bills, referred two of the bills to the president and did not give consent for the remaining 10 bills.

The state legislature passed these 10 bills again in the assembly in a special session within seven days after approaching the Supreme Court and sent them to the governor again for assent. In the Supreme Court, the Tamil government argued that it approached the court based on the provisions in Article 200 of the Constitution. It also argued that the governor had proceeded to refer all the 10 bills to the president for consideration.

“The democratically elected governments can perform independently. In the future, the governors cannot act as someone who will make roadblocks. This is a landmark judgment. Through this, our chief minister has shown the way to all the state governments,” Rajya Sabha MP P. Wilson told THE WEEK. 

India