The Supreme Court on December 13 urged Tamil Nadu Chief Minister M.K. Stalin and Governor R.N. Ravi to break the ice over hot tea, saying the “business of the government and the business of governance” should not suffer from the ensuing deadlock over the clearance of 10 crucial Bills.
The Tamil Nadu government informed a Bench headed by Chief Justice of India D.Y. Chandrachud that the Governor has invited the Chief Minister for tea. Mr. Stalin has accepted the invitation.
Also Read | Tamil Nadu Governor cannot refer re-enacted Bills to President, says Supreme Court
“Let there be a break in the deadlock. Let them meet. This is not a one-off issue… Ultimately there should be some way out of this impasse, not only for now, but for the future… There should be a channel of communication open between the Chief Minister and the Governor. At least let them start talking to each other. The business of government and the business of governance have to go on,” Chief Justice Chandrachud said.
Senior advocates A.M. Singhvi, P. Wilson and advocate Sabarish Subramanian, for Tamil Nadu, said the meeting may “break the ice” but the beverage may not resolve the “constitutional problem” triggered by the Governor’s decision to refer the Bills, re-enacted by the State Assembly, to the President for consideration instead of granting assent under Article 200 of the Constitution.
“Neither tea nor stiffer beverages can solve the constitutional problem… All this is very nice, but you [Governor] cannot send the Bills to the President,” Mr. Singhvi said.
Mr. Singhvi and Mr. Wilson, however, said the Chief Minister, in the meantime, was “more than willing to meet the Governor”. They asked the court to defer the case to January.
For status quo
The State government said the issue should not be further complicated by the President acting on the Bills by January. “Let there be a status quo,” Mr. Singhvi urged.
The court said it did not want to pass any injunctive order on the President. Nevertheless, the Bench asked Attorney General R. Venkataramani to “look into it”.
“We are trying to find out a way… Let it be seen in that spirit,” the Chief Justice addressed Mr. Venkataramani.
The Attorney General said he had intervened between the Governor and the Chief Minister in West Bengal, which is also seeing a tug-of-war over the passage of Bills. Mr. Venkataramani said the two constitutional authorities had also agreed to talk things over.
Also Read | Re-adopted Bills only seek to take away T.N. Governor’s power to appoint Vice-Chancellors
The Supreme Court had issued notice to the Governor on November 10 on a writ petition filed by the State government, accusing Mr. Ravi of delaying consent to the Bills. On November 13, the Governor had communicated to the Assembly that he had withheld consent to them. The Assembly, in a special session held on November 18, had re-enacted the Bills without amendments and sent them again to the Governor for his assent. The Governor had referred the Bills to the President on November 28.
“Article 200 of the Constitution gives the Governor three choices — grant assent to the Bills or withhold assent or reserve them for the consideration of the President. In this case, the Governor withheld assent on November 13. Once he has withheld assent, there is no question of him referring them to the President,” Chief Justice Chandrachud had observed on December 1.
The Chief Justice had said the law was already settled by the apex court in its November 10 judgment concerning the delay caused by the Punjab Governor in assenting to certain Bills.
