Jharkhand HC refuses to penalise PIO in RTI case, directs litigant to pursue land dispute separatelyJharkhand HC reinstates revenue official, quashes compulsory retirement orderChhattisgarh Civil Society blames recruitment freeze for deepening health crisisDPS Ranchi student emerges as national topper with perfect 500/500 in CBSE SSCE 2025-26Loyola School, Telco honours merit, leadership and resilience at annual prize distribution ceremonyJamshedpur police foil extortion bid, arrest man in Bengal Club road firing caseYoga Day observed with enthusiasm at Sona Devi UniversityJharkhand: A nursery where ‘jungle jalebis’ are grown, hundreds of saplings ready for plantation

Supreme Court rebukes Tamil Nadu Governor for inaction on bills

THE JHARKHAND STORY DESK   Advertisement New Delhi, April 8: The Supreme Court on Tuesday strongly criticized Tamil Nadu Governor R N…

Supreme Court rebukes Tamil Nadu Governor for inaction on bills

File photo of Tamil Nadu Governor R N Ravi

THE JHARKHAND STORY DESK

 

Advertisement
Advertisement

New Delhi, April 8: The Supreme Court on Tuesday strongly criticized Tamil Nadu Governor R N Ravi, ruling that his decision to reserve 10 Bills for the President’s consideration violated constitutional norms.

A bench comprising Justices J B Pardiwala and R Mahadevan emphasized that under Article 200 of the Constitution, the governor is bound to act based on the aid and advice of the council of ministers, leaving no room for personal discretion.

Stay informed. Get Jharkhand's top stories in your inbox.

Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Clarifying the governor’s constitutional duties, the bench stated that once a Bill is re-submitted to him after initial consideration, he must give his assent unless the Bill has undergone material changes.

The court firmly ruled that the governor cannot indefinitely withhold assent, exercise an absolute veto, or employ a pocket veto.

Also Read- New police outpost planned near Deoghar airport; Padma OP upgraded

The bench stated that the Governor is required to act within three months by either approving a Bill, sending it back to the legislature, or forwarding it to the President for consideration.

The judges stressed that the governor’s choices under Article 200 are limited — he can either grant assent, withhold assent, or reserve the Bill for the President’s consideration.

However, they pointed out that it is unconstitutional for the governor to reserve a Bill for the President once it is placed before him a second time.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Article 200, which governs the governor’s powers regarding assent to Bills, does not empower him to delay or block legislative processes at his discretion, the bench observed.

Advertisement
Advertisement
More from Breaking
Jharkhand HC refuses to penalise PIO in RTI case, directs litigant to pursue land dispute separately

Jharkhand HC refuses to penalise PIO in RTI case, directs litigant to pursue land dispute separately

June 22, 2026
Jharkhand HC reinstates revenue official, quashes compulsory retirement order

Jharkhand HC reinstates revenue official, quashes compulsory retirement order

June 22, 2026
Chhattisgarh Civil Society blames recruitment freeze for deepening health crisis

Chhattisgarh Civil Society blames recruitment freeze for deepening health crisis

June 22, 2026

Stay informed. Get Jharkhand's top stories in your inbox.

Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

About the Author

Suman Shrivastava