Governor Versus Tamil Nadu Government: Supreme Court Expresses Concern
New Delhi: The clash between Tamil Nadu Governor R. N. Ravi and M. K. Stalin-led state government has been going for a while. The Supreme Court on Tuesday (February 4) heard petitions challenging Governor’s decision to withhold assent for the bills and refer certain Bills to the President which were sent for former’s assent. The Court said that it would resolve the tussle between governor and the State in the spirit of the Constitution and in public spirit.
The case is being heard by a bench comprising Justices JB Pardiwala and R Mahadevan. The Tamil Nadu government is represented by senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, A.M. Singhvi and P. Wilson, and advocate Sabarish Subramanian, and Attorney General R Venkataramani is representing the Governor.
Also Read | ‘Jacuzzis And Photo-Ops’: PM Modi Attacks Kejriwal, Rahul Gandhi In Lok Sabha
Some of the files awaiting approval of the Governor are remission of prisoners, sanction for prosecution and the appointment of members of the Tamil Nadu Service Commission, key Bills on higher education issues, and constitution of search committees for the appointment of Vice-Chancellors.
Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for Tamil Nadu said: “Two out of 12 bills were sent for the consideration of the President and 10 sent back for reconsideration. They were re-enacted by the assembly, which is the reiteration of their view. According to the law, he has no option but to grant his assent. Those 10 bills are also sent for consideration of President,” Deccan Herald reports.
Earlier, in November 13, 2023 the Governor declared that he was withholding assent on 10 Bills, afterwards, the Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly convened a special session on November 18, 2023 and re-enacted those Bills. After this, on November 28, Governor referred some Bills to the President, especially regarding higher education in the State. As per the reports, the President gave assent to one Bill, rejected seven, and not taken the remaining two proposed laws into consideration.
Rohatgi said: “under the law, if the state legislature passes a bill, the Governor can ask for it to be reconsidered withholding assent, ask for reconsideration. If post reconsideration, the same Bill is re-enacted, or reaffirmed, then under Article 200 of the Constitution the Governor has no option but to grant assent because this is our constitutional framework. If he does not do that, the entire system of democracy fails,” Indian Express reports.
When the bench stated that so many bills are pending, “People are suffering, the state is suffering. So many bills are pending”, Tamil Nadu Governor’s counsel intervened to said that nothing is pending.
He then pointed out that the apex court had not issued a notice regarding the appointment of Vice-Chancellors and that the UGC had not been included as a party in the case, which makes it difficult for him to provide a detailed response.
Also Read | “Haven’t Written A Single Line Of Code”: Investor Slams Mumbai AI Event For Featuring Celebrities
Senior Advocate Abhishek Singhvi, also appearing for the State stated that the Governor’s refusal to approve Vice-Chancellor appointments had severely impacted university administration, destroying the academic and administrative functions of institutions. He further pointed out the Governor’s delay in decision-making on several bills has violated constitutional principles and undermined democratic governance.
Senior Advocate P Wilson, also representing the State government, criticised the Governor’s actions as part of a wider pattern of obstruction by Governors in various states, especially in Tamil Nadu.
The hearing remained unresolved and will resume on Thursday, February 6.
