Tamil Nadu Govt vs. Governor: Written Arguments Submitted in Supreme Court

Tamil Nadu Government vs. Governor: Written Arguments Submitted in Supreme Court

The Tamil Nadu government has submitted written arguments to the Supreme Court regarding the prolonged delay in approving bills passed by the state legislature. The issue of pending bills with Governor R.N. Ravi has led to a major constitutional and political debate. The Tamil Nadu government had filed a case in the Supreme Court in 2023, challenging the Governor’s inaction on 12 bills passed by the State Assembly.

Last week, when the case came up for hearing, the Supreme Court directed the Tamil Nadu government to submit its arguments in writing. Accordingly, senior advocates Mukul Rohatgi, Abhishek Singhvi, Rakesh Dwivedi, and P. Wilson have now submitted detailed legal arguments on behalf of the Tamil Nadu government.

Tamil Nadu Government’s Legal Arguments in the Supreme Court

According to the Tamil Nadu government, a Governor does not have the constitutional right to indefinitely delay decisions on bills passed by the legislature. Under the Indian Constitution, the Governor has the power to:

1. Approve the bill
2. Return the bill for reconsideration by the legislature
3. Refer the bill to the President of India for assent

However, beyond these options, the Governor has no authority to keep bills pending indefinitely. The Tamil Nadu government argues that such delays are unconstitutional and hinder the democratic process.

Key Demands of the Tamil Nadu Government:

1. The Supreme Court should order the Governor to act on the pending bills immediately.
2. Indefinite delays by the Governor violate constitutional provisions.
3. A Governor cannot bypass the state legislature and directly refer bills to the President without valid reasons.
4. The Supreme Court should clarify the Governor’s authority and prevent any misuse of discretionary powers.

Conflicting Legal Arguments: Tamil Nadu Government vs. Governor’s Position

Tamil Nadu Government’s Stand:

• As per Articles 200 and 201 of the Indian Constitution, once a bill is passed by the State Assembly, the Governor must act on it within a reasonable time.
• The Tamil Nadu Assembly has passed 12 bills, but they have been pending with the Governor for months without any action, which is unconstitutional.
• The Supreme Court should clearly define the time frame within which the Governor must act on state bills.

Governor’s Argument:

• The Governor’s legal team argues that he has the right to thoroughly review bills before taking action.
• The Governor also has the authority to refer bills to the President if he believes they conflict with constitutional provisions.
• Some bills passed by the Tamil Nadu government require legal scrutiny before approval.

Significance of This Case – Impact on Federalism in India

This case is crucial for defining the relationship between state governments and Governors in India. The Supreme Court’s decision could set a legal precedent for all Indian states, clarifying the extent of the Governor’s powers.

Growing Conflict Between Governors and State Governments

Recently, multiple states such as Tamil Nadu, Kerala, and Telangana have raised concerns over Governors delaying or withholding approval of bills passed by their respective legislatures. The Tamil Nadu government sees this as an attempt to undermine state autonomy.

Implications for Tamil Nadu:

• Welfare schemes linked to the pending bills cannot be implemented due to the Governor’s inaction.
• The functioning of the state government is directly affected.
• The role of the Governor in a federal system is being questioned.

Possible Supreme Court Rulings & Political Impact

The Supreme Court’s verdict in this case will have significant consequences for state governance across India. The ruling is expected to clarify whether a Governor can delay state bills indefinitely or if they are bound by a specific time frame.

Expected Outcomes:

• The Supreme Court may limit the Governor’s discretionary power, ensuring timely decisions on state bills.
• It could uphold the Tamil Nadu government’s demand, preventing future delays by Governors.
• The verdict may act as a precedent for all Indian states, influencing the central-state power balance.

Conclusion: A Landmark Case in Indian Constitutional Law

The legal battle between the Tamil Nadu government and Governor R.N. Ravi has brought constitutional federalism into sharp focus. The Supreme Court’s ruling will not only impact Tamil Nadu’s governance but also set a benchmark for Governor-state relations across India.

As political and legal circles await the verdict, this case could reshape how Governors exercise their powers, ensuring that state legislatures are not undermined by procedural delays.