- Thread starter
- Staff
- #1
Dadparvar
Staff member
- Nov 11, 2016
- 9,719
- 0
- 6
The Supreme Court of India on Tuesday exercised its discretionary powers to implement ten pending bills in the Indian state of Tamil Nadu, marking a significant intervention in a prolonged constitutional deadlock between the state government and state Governor R.N. Ravi.
During hearings, the Supreme Court criticized the governor’s lack of transparency and communication, questioning whether his indefinite withholding of assent was constitutionally permissible. The court emphasized that governors cannot sit on bills indefinitely or act unilaterally without informing the state legislature about their concerns regarding repugnancy with central laws. Justice J.B. Pardiwala remarked that withholding assent without explanation amounts to creating a legislative deadlock, which is against constitutional principles.
The apex court’s decision comes after months of legislative impasse, where the governor withheld assent to bills passed by the Tamil Nadu Assembly without providing adequate communication or justification. The bills in question, submitted between 2020 and 2023, primarily address administrative reforms, including provisions for appointing vice-chancellors in state universities and restructuring governance mechanisms.
Despite repeated re-enactments and reconsiderations by the Assembly, the governor either withheld consent or referred some bills to the President, leading to accusations of constitutional subversion under Article 200 of the Constitution of India, which governs a governor’s powers to grant, withhold, or reserve assent for bills passed by the state legislature. Tamil Nadu’s government argued that such delays violated constitutional norms, prompting it to approach the Supreme Court in November 2023.
The apex court’s intervention has broader implications for center-state relations and the constitutional role of governors. It highlights recurring tensions in non-Bhartiya Janata Party (BJP)-ruled states like Tamil Nadu, Kerala, Punjab, and Telangana, where governors have been accused of stalling state legislation. Compounding this issue is the strained relationship between state governments and governors in India’s federal system. Governors are often perceived as representatives of the central government rather than impartial constitutional authorities. This perception has fueled political confrontations in states governed by opposition parties, where governors have been accused of obstructing legislative processes.
The post India Supreme Court orders implementation of pending legislative bills in Tamil Nadu appeared first on JURIST - News.
Continue reading...
Note: We don't have any responsibilities about this news. Its been posted here by Feed Reader and we had no controls and checking on it. And because News posted here will be deleted automatically after 21 days, threads are closed so that no one spend time to post and discuss here. You can always check the source and discuss in their site.
During hearings, the Supreme Court criticized the governor’s lack of transparency and communication, questioning whether his indefinite withholding of assent was constitutionally permissible. The court emphasized that governors cannot sit on bills indefinitely or act unilaterally without informing the state legislature about their concerns regarding repugnancy with central laws. Justice J.B. Pardiwala remarked that withholding assent without explanation amounts to creating a legislative deadlock, which is against constitutional principles.
The apex court’s decision comes after months of legislative impasse, where the governor withheld assent to bills passed by the Tamil Nadu Assembly without providing adequate communication or justification. The bills in question, submitted between 2020 and 2023, primarily address administrative reforms, including provisions for appointing vice-chancellors in state universities and restructuring governance mechanisms.
Despite repeated re-enactments and reconsiderations by the Assembly, the governor either withheld consent or referred some bills to the President, leading to accusations of constitutional subversion under Article 200 of the Constitution of India, which governs a governor’s powers to grant, withhold, or reserve assent for bills passed by the state legislature. Tamil Nadu’s government argued that such delays violated constitutional norms, prompting it to approach the Supreme Court in November 2023.
The apex court’s intervention has broader implications for center-state relations and the constitutional role of governors. It highlights recurring tensions in non-Bhartiya Janata Party (BJP)-ruled states like Tamil Nadu, Kerala, Punjab, and Telangana, where governors have been accused of stalling state legislation. Compounding this issue is the strained relationship between state governments and governors in India’s federal system. Governors are often perceived as representatives of the central government rather than impartial constitutional authorities. This perception has fueled political confrontations in states governed by opposition parties, where governors have been accused of obstructing legislative processes.
The post India Supreme Court orders implementation of pending legislative bills in Tamil Nadu appeared first on JURIST - News.
Continue reading...
Note: We don't have any responsibilities about this news. Its been posted here by Feed Reader and we had no controls and checking on it. And because News posted here will be deleted automatically after 21 days, threads are closed so that no one spend time to post and discuss here. You can always check the source and discuss in their site.