Why did TN guv sit on bills for 3 years, asks SC

THE Supreme Court on Thursday questioned the delay by Governor R N Ravi in giving assent to the bills passed by the Tamil Nadu Assembly and framed eight questions for adjudication, including the concept of ‘pocket veto’.

- SUCHITRA KALYAN MOHANTY

The court observed that the “governor seems to have adopted his own procedure”.

A bench of Justices J B Pardiwala and R Mahadevan asked why the governor sat on the bills enacted by the Assembly for over three years before declaring that he was withholding assent and referring some of them to the President. The court observed that the stalemate between the governor and the state government continued even after the November 2023 verdict in a case filed by the Punjab government in which the top court had emphasised that governors must decide on bills without delay.

Attorney General R Venkataramani, appearing for Ravi, said the governor did not send the bills to the Assembly for reconsideration and that he only declared that he was withholding his assent.

Justice Pardiwala, however, remarked that merely declaring the withholding of assent without returning the bills to the Assembly would frustrate Article 200 of the Constitution. Justice Pardiwala said that the governor cannot simply withhold assent to a bill in the name of repugnance.

“You need to show us factually why the governor withheld assent. Either you show us from some original files, or some other documents, some contemporaneous record available with the office of the governor as to what was looked into, what was discussed, what were the lacunae,” he said.