In a landmark ruling on Tuesday, April 8, the Supreme Court of India delivered a significant verdict against Tamil Nadu Governor RN Ravi, declaring his action of withholding assent to ten key state Bills as “illegal” and “arbitrary.” The court made it clear that the Governor has no authority to reserve Bills for the President after denying assent once the Bills have been re-passed by the Assembly. The bench, comprising Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice R Mahadevan, stated that the Governor failed to act in good faith and that the withheld Bills shall be considered passed from the date they were re-submitted to him.

The verdict is seen as a major political and constitutional victory for the DMK-led Tamil Nadu government. Chief Minister MK Stalin called it a “historic judgment,” asserting that it reinforces the federal structure and the autonomy of Indian states. He reiterated DMK’s commitment to strengthening state rights and ensuring democratic principles are upheld. The court emphasized that the Governor must follow a clear timeline when deciding on state legislation, including a one-month limit for assent or reservation and an additional one-month period if the Assembly re-passes the Bill. Failing to comply with these timeframes, the court ruled, would make the Governor’s conduct subject to judicial review.

This judgment further underscores the ongoing tensions between Governor RN Ravi and the Tamil Nadu government since his appointment in 2021. The two have frequently clashed over legislative and symbolic matters, including the Governor’s refusal to read specific parts of Assembly speeches and controversies surrounding anthem protocols. The court’s decision sends a strong message that gubernatorial power must align with democratic norms and constitutional boundaries, reaffirming the supremacy of elected state legislatures in lawmaking.