Supreme Court Verdict on Tamil Nadu Governor's Action
The Supreme Court has ruled against Tamil Nadu Governor's actions regarding 10 state legislature bills, stating his withholding of assent and forwarding them to the President post-re-enactment was "illegal, non est factum and erroneous in law".
Key Rulings
- Invalid Action:
The Court declared any actions taken by the President on the bills after the Governor's withholding of assent as invalid and set aside. - Deemed Assent:
Bills are considered to have been assented to by the Governor on the date they were re-presented by the state legislature due to the undue delay and lack of bona fide action by the Governor. - Governor's Responsibility:
The Governor must send bills back to the assembly for reconsideration if withholding assent, as per Article 200. - No Absolute or Pocket Veto:
The constitutional framework does not allow for an "absolute veto" or "pocket veto" by the Governor. - Reservation for President:
Bills can only be reserved for the President at the first instance, not after re-presentation unless they're significantly altered.
Constitutional References
- Article 200:
Outlines the courses of action for the Governor regarding assent to bills: grant assent, withhold assent, or reserve for the President. - Article 142:
Used by the Court to declare the 10 bills as having received assent due to the Governor's failure to act appropriately.
The judgment emphasizes the necessity for Governors to adhere strictly to the constitutional procedures when dealing with legislative bills.
