Categories
New Delhi, April 8, 2025 — In a major verdict reinforcing the federal structure and constitutional obligations of Governors, the Supreme Court of India on Monday ruled that Tamil Nadu Governor R.N. Ravi acted illegally and arbitrarily by withholding and reserving 10 bills passed by the Tamil Nadu Assembly for the President’s assent. The Court declared the bills effectively approved from the date they were re-presented to the Governor by the state legislature.
A Bench comprising Justices J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan delivered the verdict in a case filed by the Tamil Nadu government, which accused Governor Ravi of sitting indefinitely on key legislative proposals, thereby disrupting the democratic process.
Key Highlights of the Verdict:
- Governor’s Action Termed Illegal: The Court ruled that the Governor’s move to reserve the 10 bills for the President was “illegal and erroneous,” emphasizing that a Governor must act based on the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers, and cannot exercise discretion arbitrarily.
- Bills Deemed Assented: The Supreme Court invoked its constitutional powers to declare the 10 bills as effectively assented to, noting that the Governor had failed to act within a reasonable timeframe even after the bills were re-presented to him.
- Clear Timelines Set: The ruling laid down specific timelines for Governors to act on bills:
- One month to withhold assent or reserve the bill for the President — but only with the aid and advice of ministers.
- If returned, the Governor must do so within three months.
- Once re-passed by the Assembly, the Governor is bound to give assent within one month.
- Warning Against Political Bias: The Court sternly noted that Governors cannot act on “political expediency” and reminded that they are constitutional heads, not political actors.
This landmark judgment comes amid growing tension between the Tamil Nadu government and Governor Ravi, who has faced criticism for delaying or refusing assent to several key bills passed by the state legislature — including those relating to higher education and administrative reforms.
A Boost to Federalism
Legal experts hailed the verdict as a major step in clarifying the role of Governors in the legislative process. “This judgment strengthens the principle that the elected government is supreme in matters of lawmaking, and Governors are constitutionally bound to facilitate that process — not stall it,” said senior advocate Indira Jaising.
Chief Minister M.K. Stalin welcomed the decision, calling it “a victory for democracy, federalism, and the people of Tamil Nadu.” The ruling is expected to have ripple effects across other states where Governors have been accused of delaying or obstructing legislation passed by elected governments.
With this judgment, the Supreme Court has reasserted the sanctity of legislative authority in states and laid down a powerful precedent to curb constitutional delays by gubernatorial offices.
