Supreme Court Ends TN Governor-Bill Standoff

In a landmark judgment on Tuesday, the Supreme Court of India stepped in to resolve a prolonged constitutional impasse between the Tamil Nadu government and Governor R.N. Ravi, declaring 10 State Bills as effectively approved.

The apex court criticized the Governor’s extended silence and subsequent decision to refer these Bills to the President, calling the move “legally erroneous.” The bench, led by Justices J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan, clarified that when a Bill is passed once again by the State Legislature and presented to the Governor, “the Governor shall not withhold assent.”

Months of Constitutional Deadlock Ends

The ruling follows months—and in some cases, years—of inaction by the Governor's office, which had stalled key legislations passed by the Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly. This inaction had led to a political and legal standoff, with Chief Minister M.K. Stalin’s government accusing Governor Ravi of stifling the democratic process by neither assenting to nor returning the Bills in a reasonable time frame.

The Supreme Court observed that the “deliberate inaction and indefinite delays” are inconsistent with the constitutional framework that mandates the Governor to act on the advice of the elected State government.

Key Observations by the Supreme Court

• The Governor’s prolonged delay and his action of forwarding the Bills to the President lacked a legal basis and was therefore “erroneous in law.”

• The court set a timeline of one to three months for Governors to act on Bills once passed or re-passed by the State Assembly.

• Once a Bill is returned, reconsidered, and passed again by the State legislature, the Governor is constitutionally obligated to give assent.

This decision sets a precedent to prevent arbitrary delays by Governors in future, particularly in opposition-ruled states.

Legal Teams and Representation

• Attorney General R. Venkataramani represented the Union of India.

• Senior Advocates A.M. Singhvi, Rakesh Dwivedi, and P. Wilson, along with advocate Sabarish Subramanian, appeared for the State of Tamil Nadu.

The court’s judgment could potentially shift the balance in several ongoing disputes between Governors and State governments across India, where similar delays have been observed.

What This Means for Tamil Nadu

With this verdict, Chief Minister M.K. Stalin’s administration is expected to move swiftly to implement the 10 Bills that were in limbo. It also serves as a political win for the DMK-led government, which has long accused the Raj Bhavan of being an obstacle to governance.