How Supreme Court cleared 10 Bills using extraordinary powers
The Supreme Court of India used its extraordinary powers under Article 142 of the Constitution to clear 10 Bills that had been withheld by Tamil Nadu Governor RN Ravi. Here’s a summary of how this happened:
Governor’s Action: Governor Ravi withheld assent to 10 Bills passed by the Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly, a move criticized as a “pocket veto.” After the Assembly re-passed these Bills, the Governor referred them to the President for consideration.
Legal Challenge: The Tamil Nadu government challenged this action in court, arguing it was unconstitutional and disrupted governance.
Supreme Court’s Decision
Use of Article 142: The Supreme Court invoked Article 142, which allows it to pass orders necessary to do “complete justice.” The court declared that the Bills were deemed to have received the Governor’s assent on the date they were resubmitted after being passed a second time by the Assembly.
Criticism of Governor’s Action: The court termed the Governor’s actions as “illegal” and “erroneous in law,” stating that he did not act in a bona fide manner and showed scant respect for previous court decisions.
Timeline for Governors: The court set clear timelines for Governors to act on Bills: one month for withholding assent, three months if acting against the State Cabinet’s advice, and one month for Bills re-presented after reconsideration.
Limit on Gubernatorial Discretion: The ruling limits the Governor’s ability to indefinitely delay Bills, emphasizing the primacy of the legislative process and curbing executive overreach.
Impact on Centre-State Relations: The decision is seen as a significant shift in Centre-state relations, potentially affecting similar disputes in other states.
