Ten bills passed by the Tamil Nadu government — some as far back as 2020 — have finally become law. This follows a landmark Supreme Court ruling that said Governor RN Ravi's refusal to assent to the bills was illegal.
These bills had been cleared twice by the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam-led state government, but the Governor had refused to give his approval. He later referred them to President Droupadi Murmu, a move now declared invalid by the top court.
A bench of Justices SB Pardiwala and R Mahadevan ruled that the Governor cannot reserve a bill for the President after denying assent the first time. The court stated: “These bills shall be deemed to be cleared from the date they were re-presented.”
This means the bills became law from 18 November 2023, when they were last re-sent. The state government has issued official gazette notifications to this effect.
Also read: Amit Shah confirms AIADMK-BJP alliance for 2026 TN Polls
Among the key bills is one that changes how Vice Chancellors of state-run universities are appointed. It limits the Governor's role in these appointments. Mr Ravi had twice returned this bill, sparking political tensions with the ruling DMK.
The Tamil Nadu Assembly even held a special session to re-pass the bills unanimously and re-send them to the Governor. Despite this, he withheld assent again and escalated the matter to the President.
The Supreme Court was critical of the Governor’s conduct. In earlier hearings, the judges had asked why it took him nearly three years to raise objections. In January, the court warned both the Governor and the state to sort out their issues — or it would intervene.
Chief Minister MK Stalin welcomed the ruling, calling it a "historic verdict" and a victory for federalism. He said it was not just a win for Tamil Nadu, but for all Indian states dealing with similar disputes.
The DMK had moved the court in 2023, accusing Governor Ravi of deliberately delaying the bills to obstruct governance. Mr Ravi, appointed by the BJP-led central government, denied this.
The court reaffirmed that under Article 200 of the Constitution, Governors have only three options with a bill: give assent, withhold it, or send it to the President. It also said these decisions must be made within one month, and delays could face judicial review.
Importantly, the court clarified that it was not undermining the Governor's powers, but reaffirming the principles of parliamentary democracy.
Follow us
