The Crossbill News Desk
The recent advisory opinion delivered by a five-judge constitution bench of the Supreme Court on the Presidential Reference concerning the powers of governors and the president over state Bills has triggered a debate on its practical implications, particularly in Tamil Nadu.
According to a report by The New Indian Express (TNIE), three senior legal experts believe the opinion will not override or dilute the earlier ruling of a two-judge bench that conferred “deemed assent” to ten state Bills pending with governor R.N. Ravi.
Justice K. Chandru, former judge of the Madras high court, told TNIE that the Supreme Court’s opinion issued on November 20 is “advisory in nature.”
He added, “So, the present view of the court cannot torpedo the earlier judicial order.”
The matter carries significant weight in Tamil Nadu given the ongoing standoff between the state government and the Raj Bhavan, particularly over the appointment of vice chancellors (VCs).
Several of the Bills that received deemed assent relate to changing norms on university appointments. As things stand, 14 state universities are without permanent vice chancellors and the governor has yet to act on the matter.
With the Supreme Court clarifying that a governor’s silence cannot amount to deemed assent, legal experts cited by TNIE argue the process of filling long-pending vacancies may become even more complicated. Some universities, including Bharathidasan University, have been headless for more than three years, which the newspaper notes has created a “crisis of governance.”
The issue is also before the courts. Tamil Nadu has appealed against the interim stay issued by a vacation bench of the Madras high court on nine of the ten Bills cleared under deemed assent. The case will be taken up by the Supreme Court in the first week of December, making the latest opinion particularly relevant.
Justice Chandru further noted that while the Constitution does not prescribe a specific time limit for governors to act on Bills, the court reiterated that governors must choose among only three actions: grant assent, return the Bill to the legislature, or reserve it for the president.
“For forwarding the Bills to the president as well, the Supreme Court has now put a rider – the governor cannot just forward the Bills to the president, he has to assign reasons for doing so,” he told TNIE.
Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam MP and senior advocate P. Wilson echoed this position, saying the advisory opinion is “not binding” and does not affect the Supreme Court’s April 8 deemed assent ruling, which was delivered under its “adjudicatory jurisdiction.”
Senior counsel K.M. Vijayan also agreed, adding that the advisory opinion “cannot be considered a setback for the states.” He noted that the ruling has clarified that states retain the option to approach the court when a governor does not fulfil constitutional responsibilities.
Meanwhile, the administrative vacuum in universities remains a growing concern. Former Madras University vice chancellor P. Duraisamy told TNIE the prolonged lack of appointments could have lasting consequences.
“Students will be the ultimate sufferers. Without a full-time VC, key administrative decisions, academic advancements, faculty appointments and research initiatives remain stalled. The academic loss incurred today will reflect for years,” he said.
According to a report by The New Indian Express (TNIE), three senior legal experts believe the opinion will not override or dilute the earlier ruling of a two-judge bench that conferred “deemed assent” to ten state Bills pending with governor R.N. Ravi.
Justice K. Chandru, former judge of the Madras high court, told TNIE that the Supreme Court’s opinion issued on November 20 is “advisory in nature.”
He added, “So, the present view of the court cannot torpedo the earlier judicial order.”
The matter carries significant weight in Tamil Nadu given the ongoing standoff between the state government and the Raj Bhavan, particularly over the appointment of vice chancellors (VCs).
Several of the Bills that received deemed assent relate to changing norms on university appointments. As things stand, 14 state universities are without permanent vice chancellors and the governor has yet to act on the matter.
With the Supreme Court clarifying that a governor’s silence cannot amount to deemed assent, legal experts cited by TNIE argue the process of filling long-pending vacancies may become even more complicated. Some universities, including Bharathidasan University, have been headless for more than three years, which the newspaper notes has created a “crisis of governance.”
The issue is also before the courts. Tamil Nadu has appealed against the interim stay issued by a vacation bench of the Madras high court on nine of the ten Bills cleared under deemed assent. The case will be taken up by the Supreme Court in the first week of December, making the latest opinion particularly relevant.
Justice Chandru further noted that while the Constitution does not prescribe a specific time limit for governors to act on Bills, the court reiterated that governors must choose among only three actions: grant assent, return the Bill to the legislature, or reserve it for the president.
“For forwarding the Bills to the president as well, the Supreme Court has now put a rider – the governor cannot just forward the Bills to the president, he has to assign reasons for doing so,” he told TNIE.
Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam MP and senior advocate P. Wilson echoed this position, saying the advisory opinion is “not binding” and does not affect the Supreme Court’s April 8 deemed assent ruling, which was delivered under its “adjudicatory jurisdiction.”
Senior counsel K.M. Vijayan also agreed, adding that the advisory opinion “cannot be considered a setback for the states.” He noted that the ruling has clarified that states retain the option to approach the court when a governor does not fulfil constitutional responsibilities.
Meanwhile, the administrative vacuum in universities remains a growing concern. Former Madras University vice chancellor P. Duraisamy told TNIE the prolonged lack of appointments could have lasting consequences.
“Students will be the ultimate sufferers. Without a full-time VC, key administrative decisions, academic advancements, faculty appointments and research initiatives remain stalled. The academic loss incurred today will reflect for years,” he said.
Comments (0)
Leave a Comment