The
Supreme Court on Tuesday stated that the Tamil Nadu Governor's decision to
reserve ten bills for the President's assent is illegal and liable to be set
aside.
The
top court also ruled that any subsequent actions taken by the President
concerning the ten bills in question hold no legal validity.
It
further held that the ten bills should be considered as having received the
Governor’s assent on the date they were re-submitted after being passed again
by the Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly.
The
Bench, comprising Justices JB Pardiwala and R Mahadevan, concluded that the
Governor acted in bad faith. The judgment noted that after keeping the bills
pending for an extended period, the Governor chose to refer them to the
President shortly after the Supreme Court’s ruling in the Punjab Governor case,
which clarified that Governors are not permitted to indefinitely delay action
on bills, thereby blocking their passage.
Justice
Pardiwala said that the Constitution does not allow for an "absolute
veto" or a "pocket veto". Referring to Article 200 of the
Constitution, the court explained that a Governor must either assent to a bill,
withhold assent, or reserve it for the President — but this reservation must
happen at the initial stage.
"As
a general rule, it is not open for the Governor to reserve a Bill for the
President after the bills have been re-presented by the Government after being
passed again by the Assembly. The only exception is when the bill presented in
the second round is different from the first version," Justice Pardiwala
said.