Today, three judges, including Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, listened to the Kerala and Tamil Nadu Governments’ concerns about governors holding back various bills. Chief Justice questioned, ‘What was the governor doing for the last three years?’ as advocates argued against bills being held without explanation.
Senior Advocates pointed out that the Tamil Nadu Governor, R. N. Ravi, can’t just say he “withholds” bills without giving a reason. They emphasized that once a bill is re-passed, it’s like a money bill and cannot be sent back for reconsideration.
They referred to a similar case in Telangana in April 2023, highlighting that the Governor violated Article 200 by not responding promptly and not sending the bills back to the Assembly with a message.
The Attorney General of India argued that the issue of what the Governor must do after a bill is re-passed is a separate matter, not relevant to this case. He explained that the pending bills were withheld due to concerns about the Governor’s powers in appointing Vice Chancellors.
The Bench noted that the Governor acted only after the Supreme Court’s interference, questioning why it took three years. The Attorney General requested the case to be deferred, citing the TN Legislative Assembly’s special session.
In a similar case with the Kerala Government, the Supreme Court issued notice to the Union. Senior Advocate K.K. Venugopal mentioned eight pending bills before Governor Arif Mohammed Khan.
The Chief Justice posed a crucial question: ‘When does the proviso come into being?’ Referring to Article 200, he asked if the Governor can withhold a bill without sending it to the Legislative Assembly for reconsideration. Advocates argued that the proviso is part of withholding the bill, obligating the Governor to send it back for reconsideration.
The Court scheduled the challenges against the TN Governor for December 1, 2023, allowing time for the Governor’s office to respond. The Kerala Governor’s challenges will be heard on November 24, 2023.
