Governor's Role Under Scrutiny: Supreme Court Examines Assent Delay

The Supreme Court is addressing a conflict between Tamil Nadu's government and Governor R N Ravi over delays in granting assent to legislative bills. The court formulated questions examining the Governor's powers under Article 200 of the Constitution, including discretionary authority and the applicability of 'pocket veto'. A verdict is pending.

The Supreme Court is set to confront the ongoing tussle between Tamil Nadu's government and its Governor, R N Ravi, over delays in approval of legislative bills. This legal battle, like a chess match, sees both sides jousting over the governor's decision not to act on a dozen bills, igniting questions about the constitutional powers at play.

A bench comprising Justices J B Pardiwala and R Mahadevan has curated 12 critical questions, diving deep into Article 200 of the Constitution. The questions probe the governor’s power to withhold or reserve bills for presidential consideration, while exploring if his discretion can override the statutory advice of the state's council of ministers.

Addressing the 'pocket veto' concept, the court seeks to clarify timelines for gubernatorial assent and whether delays bear constitutional backing. This inquiry into legislative procedure arose after the Tamil Nadu government sought judiciary intervention in light of 12 bills languishing without gubernatorial approval since 2020.