This correspondence aligns with Article 143(1) of the Indian Constitution, which states: “If at any time it appears to the President that a question of law or fact has arisen, or is likely to arise, which is of such a nature and of such public importance that it is expedient to obtain the opinion of the Supreme Court upon it, he may refer the question to that Court for consideration.”
In her letter, three critical questions arose amidst the ongoing disputes between the Tamil Nadu government and the Tamil Nadu Governor regarding the constitutional rights of a democratically elected government and the authority held by state governors in approving legislation.
The three questions from President Murmu’s letter are as follows:
Question No. 3: Is the exercise of constitutional discretion by the Governor under Article 200 of the Constitution of India justiciable?
Question No. 4: Is Article 361 of the Constitution of India an absolute bar to judicial review concerning the actions of a Governor under Article 200 of the Constitution of India?
Question No. 5: In the absence of a constitutionally prescribed time limit, and the manner of exercise of powers by the Governor, can timelines be imposed and the manner of exercise be prescribed through judicial orders for the exercise of all powers under Article 200 of the Constitution of India by the Governor?
Read more: President Murmu seeks Supreme Court’s opinion on timelines for assent to Bills, poses 14 questions
Clash between TN government and Governor
The Tamil Nadu government and Governor R N Ravi have been locked in a prolonged dispute over the constitutional rights of the governor and whether the office can overturn legislation passed by democratically elected state governments.
Subsequently, the Tamil Nadu government took legal action against the Governor for delaying the assent of 10 bills passed by the state legislature, which were awaiting presidential approval.
In April, the Supreme Court’s constitutional bench directed Governor Ravi to approve these 10 bills within a three-month period. The DMK-led Tamil Nadu government celebrated this ruling as a victory for democracy. Nevertheless, the questions posed by the President to the Supreme Court referencing constitutional provisions might dampen that celebration.
This is primarily due to President Murmu questioning the constitutionality of the three-month timeline set by the court for Governor Ravi to provide assent. “In the absence of a constitutionally prescribed time limit, and the manner of exercise of powers by the Governor, can timelines be imposed?” the President’s letter queries.
Read more: Supreme Court sets three-month deadline for President to decide on Bills referred by Governor
CM Stalin questions BJP over President’s reference
Tamil Nadu Chief Minister M K Stalin responded sharply to these questions. “Is the BJP trying to legitimize its Governors’ obstruction by permitting indefinite delays in Bill assent? Does the Union government plan to paralyze non-BJP State Legislatures?” he inquired.
What may perplex Tamil Nadu’s legal experts is President Murmu’s implication that actions taken by governors or the president may not face judicial scrutiny, as outlined in Article 361 of the Indian Constitution, which states: “The President, or the Governor or Rajpramukh of a State, shall not be answerable to any court for the exercise and performance of the powers and duties of his office or for any act done or purporting to be done by him in the exercise and performance of those powers and duties.”
A fundamental interpretation of this provision could undermine the April ruling against Governor Ravi. President Murmu raises a pertinent question: “Is Article 361 of the Constitution of India an absolute bar to judicial review regarding the actions of a Governor under Article 200 of the Constitution of India?”
In response, Stalin claimed that the entire presidential reference initiative aims to “subvert” the Supreme Court’s clarification regarding the governor’s constitutional role. “I strongly condemn the Union Government’s Presidential reference, which seeks to undermine the Constitutional position already established by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the Tamil Nadu Governor’s case and other precedents,” the Chief Minister’s statement declared.
The Chief Minister further asserted that President Murmu’s letter reveals the BJP-led Centre’s “sinister intent to distort” Constitutional provisions and render Opposition-led state legislatures ineffective. “I urge all non-BJP states and party leaders to unite in this legal fight to uphold the constitution,” he concluded.
Indications suggest that this latest confrontation between the Tamil Nadu Government and its governor, now involving the President, could mark a new chapter in the ongoing tension between the legislature and Governor RN Ravi.
Read more: Supreme Court calls for performance audit of judges over breaks
