SC Calls for Resolution in Tamil Nadu Governor-Bills Impasse

December 2, 2023

The Supreme Court has intervened in the ongoing impasse between the Tamil Nadu Governor, R N Ravi, and Chief Minister M K Stalin over the delay in clearing Bills sent by the Assembly. The court emphasized that a Governor cannot withhold assent and refer a Bill for Presidential consideration without returning it to the Assembly. The Chief Justice of India, D Y Chandrachud, urged the Governor to engage with the Chief Minister and resolve the deadlock. The court expressed concern about the constitutional functionary and highlighted the need for dialogue to address the issues.

Key Points from SC’s Remarks

Impasse Resolution: The Supreme Court urged Tamil Nadu Governor R N Ravi to engage with Chief Minister M K Stalin and resolve the impasse over the delay in clearing Bills sent by the Assembly.
Constitutional Functionary: The court acknowledged that it is dealing with a high constitutional functionary and emphasized the importance of resolving differences through dialogue.
Governor’s Options: The court clarified that if a Governor withholds assent to a Bill, he must send it back to the Assembly and cannot simply retain the Bill. The Governor cannot refer the Bill for Presidential consideration after the Assembly re-enacts it.
Three Options: The court highlighted that the Governor has three options under Article 200 of the Constitution: assent to the Bill, withhold assent, or reserve the Bill for the consideration of the President.
Prohibition on Withholding Assent: Once the Governor withholds assent, he cannot then refer the Bill to the President. The court emphasized that there is no fourth option for the Governor, and he must follow one of the three specified options.
Constitutional Implications: The court pointed out that the President holds an elected office and has broader powers conferred by the Constitution, while the Governor, as a nominee of the Union government, must exercise options specified in Article 200.
Message or Recommendation: The court distinguished between withholding assent and sending a message or making a recommendation. Once the Assembly disregards the Governor’s recommendation, the Bill returns to the Governor, who then has no option.
Pending Proceedings: The court expressed concern about the Governor’s actions while the matter is pending before the court and acknowledged the potential for constitutional obstinacy.