Why the Supreme Court verdict on TN governor is a double-edged sword

The Supreme Court’s 414-page judgement in the State of Tamil Nadu versus Governor of Tamil Nadu case pronounced on April 8 is the most consequential judicial intervention in federal relations in recent Indian constitutional history.

By imposing specific timelines on gubernatorial action, an area in which the Constitution has remained conspicuously silent, the court has fundamentally reshaped the boundaries of federalism, the separation of powers and constitutional governance.

Justice JB Pardiwala framed the decision as enforcing the original design of the Constitution rather than rewriting it.

But this judgement also raises profound questions about the separation of powers and “juristocracy”, which legal scholar Ran Hirschl describes as a situation in which the judiciary wields disproportionate authority, effectively usurping power from the political executive.

Constitutional impasse

The case emerged from an extraordinary situation where the Tamil Nadu governor delayed action on several bills passed by the state legislature. This amounted to a “pocket veto”. After the Supreme Court in November 2023 issued the governor notice on the state government’s complaint that 12 bills had been held up, some since January 2020, the governor abruptly withheld assent from 10 of these bills.

The Legislative Assembly passed these bills again without significant amendments. Rather than granting assent, as required by the first proviso to Article...

Read more

News