Supreme Court Nullifies Tamil Nadu Governor’s Delay in Approving State Bills

CURRENT AFFAIRS: Supreme Court Nullifies Tamil Nadu Governor’s Delay in Approving State Bills,Tamil Nadu vs Governor Case 2025, Article 200 Constitution, SC Verdict on Governor Powers, Pocket Veto India, Governor Bill Assent Rules, Dr. Ambedkar Constitutional Quotes, Tamil Nadu VC Appointment Bills, Article 142 Supreme Court

Supreme Court Nullifies Tamil Nadu Governor’s Delay in Approving State Bills

Supreme Court Criticizes Governor’s Actions

Supreme Court Nullifies Tamil Nadu Governor’s Delay in Approving State Bills : In a landmark verdict, the Supreme Court of India ruled that Tamil Nadu Governor R.N. Ravi’s decision to forward 10 state legislative Bills to the President was ruled unconstitutional and legally invalid . The bench, comprising Justices J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan, stressed that the Governor must act as per the advice of the State Cabinet under Article 200 and cannot function as an independent authority.

Timeline of the Dispute and Legal Action

From 2020 to 2023, the Tamil Nadu Assembly enacted 12 Bills, primarily focused on the appointment of Vice-Chancellors. The Governor delayed assent, leading to the State approaching the apex court in November 2023. The Governor subsequently withheld assent to 10 Bills and sent 2 for Presidential review. Even after the Assembly re-enacted the 10 Bills, the Governor once more forwarded them to the President. The Court found this action legally untenable.

Interpretation of Article 200: No Pocket Veto

The Court clarified that under Article 200, a Governor may:

  1. Grant assent
  2. Withhold assent
  3. Reserve the Bill for Presidential consideration

However, once a Bill is re-passed by the Assembly, the Governor is constitutionally obligated to grant assent.The judgment underlined that a Governor is not a political figure and must not delay or obstruct the democratic will of the Assembly.

Article 142 Invoked to Uphold Legislative Power

The Supreme Court invoked its special powers under Article 142, deeming all 10 Bills as assented to by default. The bench slammed the Governor’s “scant respect” for the Constitution and referenced past rulings like the Punjab case. Justice Pardiwala echoed Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, stating that the true strength of a Constitution lies in the commitment of those who implement it.

STATIC GK SNAPSHOT

Supreme Court Nullifies Tamil Nadu Governor’s Delay in Approving State Bills :

Element Details
Case Title State of Tamil Nadu vs. Governor of Tamil Nadu
Court Supreme Court of India
Judges Justices J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan
Key Articles Article 200 (Governor’s Assent), Article 142 (Supreme Court Powers)
Governor Involved R.N. Ravi
Central Issue Delay and referral of 10 State Bills
Verdict Bills deemed assented; Governor’s action invalid
Notable Quote Dr. Ambedkar – “However good a constitution may be…”
Relevance for Exams Polity, Constitution, Governance – UPSC, TNPSC, SSC

Supreme Court Nullifies Tamil Nadu Governor’s Delay in Approving State Bills
  1. The Supreme Court invalidated the Governor’s referral of 10 State Bills to the President.
  2. The case reaffirmed the Governor’s obligation under Article 200 to act on Cabinet advice.
  3. The dispute arose over 12 Bills passed between 2020 and 2023 by the Tamil Nadu Assembly.
  4. N. Ravi, the Governor of Tamil Nadu, delayed Bill assent for nearly three years.
  5. The main conflict was over Vice-Chancellor appointment Bills passed by the State Assembly.
  6. The Governor sent 2 Bills to the President and withheld 10 without clear reasoning.
  7. After the Bills were re-enacted, the Governor again referred them, defying constitutional protocol.
  8. The Court ruled that a Governor has no Pocket Veto under Article 200.
  9. A Governor can only assent, withhold assent, or reserve a Bill for the President.
  10. Once re-passed, the Governor is constitutionally bound to give assent.
  11. The Court invoked Article 142, declaring all 10 Bills assented by default.
  12. The bench condemned the Governor’s delay as showing “scant respect” for the Constitution.
  13. Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice R. Mahadevan authored the landmark verdict.
  14. The Court highlighted that Governors are not political figures, but constitutional heads.
  15. The Tamil Nadu Government moved the Supreme Court in November 2023.
  16. The verdict cited past cases like the Punjab Governor dispute for precedence.
  17. The Court stressed on democratic federalism and legislative supremacy of elected governments.
  18. Ambedkar’s quote was referenced on the importance of moral commitment to Constitution.
  19. The issue exposed gaps in State-Centre institutional relations and governor accountability.
  20. The judgment strengthens State autonomy and reaffirms constitutional balance of powers.

 

 

Q1. Under which Article is the Governor required to act on the advice of the State Cabinet?


Q2. How many Bills were re-passed by the Tamil Nadu Assembly and again sent to the President?


Q3. Which two Justices delivered the Supreme Court verdict in this case?


Q4. What special constitutional power did the Supreme Court invoke in this case?


Q5. What is the core principle reiterated by the Court about the Governor's role?


Your Score: 0

Daily Current Affairs April 11

Descriptive CA PDF

One-Liner CA PDF

MCQ CA PDF​

CA PDF Tamil

Descriptive CA PDF Tamil

One-Liner CA PDF Tamil

MCQ CA PDF Tamil

CA PDF Hindi

Descriptive CA PDF Hindi

One-Liner CA PDF Hindi

MCQ CA PDF Hindi

News of the Day

Premium

National Tribal Health Conclave 2025: Advancing Inclusive Healthcare for Tribal India
New Client Special Offer

20% Off

Aenean leo ligulaconsequat vitae, eleifend acer neque sed ipsum. Nam quam nunc, blandit vel, tempus.