Tamil Nadu Governor’s Assent Dilemma: A Constitutional Conundrum
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court has raised concerns regarding Tamil Nadu Governor R N Ravi’s recent actions in relation to the bills passed by the state assembly. The court questioned the governor for withholding assent without providing any justifications, suggesting that he appears to have created his own procedural norms that deviate from constitutional mandates.
A bench consisting of Justices J B Pardiwala and R Mahadevan, while deliberating on the ongoing legal tussle between the Tamil Nadu government and the governor, highlighted that such actions frustrate Article 200 of the Constitution. This article stipulates that the governor must either give approval to bills or return them for reconsideration, yet Ravi has referred only two of the twelve bills sent to him to the President, withholding consent on the remaining ten.
“It does not make sense to withhold assent and not send it to the legislature, thereby frustrating the provision of Article 200. He seems to have adopted his own procedure,” the bench remarked. The justices emphasized that the governor’s decision to withhold consent without providing reasons could lead to legislative deadlock. They asserted that a governor should offer reasons when seeking reconsideration so that the assembly can examine the matter afresh.
As the political landscape in Tamil Nadu continues to evolve, the implications of this legal battle could resonate beyond state lines. For those looking to stay updated on the latest developments in political affairs, visit Looffers.com for timely news and insights.
Stay Informed with Looffers.com
For comprehensive coverage of political events and more, make sure to check out Looffers.com. Your go-to platform for news that matters!
