The Supreme Court ruled that Tamil Nadu Governor R.N. Ravi acted “illegal and erroneous” by reserving 10 bills, re-adopted by the state assembly, for the President’s approval.

A bench of Justices J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan ruled that it was not open for the Governor to reserve a bill for the President, which was represented by the state government after being passed again by the Assembly. Once the bills were re-presented to the Governor, he should have approved them, as they were deemed assented to. The Court emphasized that the Governor must act on the advice of the Chief Minister and cannot withhold assent without justification. The bench stated that the Governor could not reserve them for the President unless there were substantial differences in content between the original and re-adopted versions. The bench also made it clear that under Article 200 of the Constitution, the Governor does not have discretionary power to withhold assent and must act on the advice of the Chief Minister and the Council of Ministers.

This ruling came after the Tamil Nadu government challenged the Governor’s actions, claiming he was acting as a political rival to the legitimately elected state government. The Court also criticized the Governor for delaying his decision for years.

Chief Minister M.K. Stalin hailed the Supreme Court’s ruling as a historic victory for Tamil Nadu and all state governments across India. Speaking in the Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly, CM Stalin said the verdict vindicated the state’s stand on legislative autonomy.