The Supreme Court held that Tamil Nadu Governor RN Ravi had acted unconstitutionally by withholding assent to 10 bills cleared by the state Assembly and referring them to the President. The court emphasized that the Governor has no individual discretion in this regard and has to act on the advice of the state council of ministers.
This ruling is an important clarification regarding the powers of Governors in India. The bench, presided over by Justices JB Pardiwala and R Mahadevan, held that all 10 bills would be treated as approved from the date they were re-submitted to the Governor after being re-considered by the Assembly.
The court said that if a bill is passed by the Assembly for a second time, the Governor must sign it off—unless it’s an alternate version of the original bill. The Governor has only three choices: approve the bill, hold back on approval, or send it to the President for deliberation—but only on the advice of the state cabinet. The Governor can’t keep postponing decisions or refuse bills altogether at his whim.
Significantly, the court made it clear that Article 200 of the Constitution does not confer any independent power on the Governor to act according to his own discretion—he has to act in accordance with the advice of the elected government.
To avoid such delays in the future, the Supreme Court also imposed time limits for action under Article 200:
If the Governor is withholding assent or returning a bill to the President along with the advice of the cabinet, he has to decide within one month.
If the Governor is acting against the advice of the cabinet, he has to decide within three months.
If the bill is returned to him after reconsideration by the Assembly, he has to give his assent within one month.
The court further noted that this judgment does not disrespects the office of the Governor. Rather, it pointed out that the Governor has to respect the ethos of parliamentary democracy and play a neutral role—not that of a creator of political hindrance. His should be the role of a guide and mediator, the court added, not an obstacle to the work of elected governments.
Chief Minister MK Stalin had previously blamed the Governor of attempting to hamper the operations of the Tamil Nadu government by withholding these bills. He also asserted that the central government is employing Governors to impinge upon opposition-governed states.
