The Supreme Court on November 20 took note of the Tamil Nadu government’s argument that the Constitution does not provide Governor R.N. Ravi “discretion” to withhold the 10 Bills “re-passed” by the State Legislative Assembly.
“Once they have been re-passed, these Bills are put in the same footing as Money Bills. Then you [the Governor] cannot reject...” Chief Justice of India D.Y. Chandrachud, heading a three-judge Bench, remarked.
The court was reacting to arguments raised by the State, represented by senior advocates A.M. Singhvi, Mukul Rohatgi, P. Wilson and advocate Sabarish Subramanian, that the first proviso of Article 200 states: “if the Bill is passed again by the House or Houses with or without amendment and presented to the Governor for assent, the Governor shall not withhold assent therefrom”.
