"These bills were pending since 2020. What was he doing for three years?"" The SC slammed Tamil Nadu governor RN Ravi on Monday. Let us discuss the full story but before that, if you are watching this on Facebook do like our page and if you are watching this on Youtube do subscribe to HW News English.
The Supreme Court on Monday came down heavy on Tamil Nadu Governor RN Ravi, as it resumed hearing the Tamil Nadu government's plea against delays in clearing bills. ""These bills were pending since 2020. What was he doing for three years?"" The bench headed by CJI DY Chandrachud said.
The court - hearing similar pleas by the Punjab and Kerala governments - also raised a point of law - ""can a Governor withhold assent on a bill without sending it back to the Assembly?""
Now what made the court slam the Tamil Nadu governor?
The court's strong observations come days after Mr RN Ravi returned ten bills - two of which were passed by the earlier AIADMK government.
The Tamil Nadu Assembly then held a special session on Saturday to re-adopt all ten bills, which were sent back to the Governor for his assent.
To which the SC said: ""Assembly has passed the bills again and sent it to the Governor. Let us see what the Governor does,"" and the court adjourned the matter till December 1.
The Tamil Nadu government has accused the BJP-appointed Governor of deliberately delaying the bills' clearance and scuttling the state's development by ""undermining the elected administration"".
Let's quickly discuss what the Constitution says about the role of the governor in giving assent to the bills.
When a Bill passed by the legislature of a state is presented to the Governor, the Governor has four options: (1) grant assent to the Bill; (2) withhold assent to the Bills; (3) return the Bills for reconsideration; or (4) reserve the Bill for the consideration of the President.
However, Article 200 also has a proviso which says that the Governor “may, as soon as possible” return Bills other than Money Bills, with a message requesting that the House reconsider it in parts or in whole. However, once the Legislative House reconsiders the Bill and sends it to the Governor once again, the Governor “shall not withhold assent there from”.
The proviso says the Governor must return the Bill “as soon as possible” but does not prescribe a specific timeframe which is where th conflict arises between the governors and the opposition rullled CM's.
Apart from Tamil Nadu, Kerala, Telangana, and Punjab too, have sought the intervention of the Supreme Court on the issue.
It is very interesting that such tug-of-war between the governor and the CM is only happening in opposition-ruled states. Such instances will only result in a lack of respect among the two most important authorities which is not healthy for a democracy.
Do let us know in the comments box whether you feel the governors are creating hurdles for the state government which is actually halting the development of th
The Supreme Court on Monday came down heavy on Tamil Nadu Governor RN Ravi, as it resumed hearing the Tamil Nadu government's plea against delays in clearing bills. ""These bills were pending since 2020. What was he doing for three years?"" The bench headed by CJI DY Chandrachud said.
The court - hearing similar pleas by the Punjab and Kerala governments - also raised a point of law - ""can a Governor withhold assent on a bill without sending it back to the Assembly?""
Now what made the court slam the Tamil Nadu governor?
The court's strong observations come days after Mr RN Ravi returned ten bills - two of which were passed by the earlier AIADMK government.
The Tamil Nadu Assembly then held a special session on Saturday to re-adopt all ten bills, which were sent back to the Governor for his assent.
To which the SC said: ""Assembly has passed the bills again and sent it to the Governor. Let us see what the Governor does,"" and the court adjourned the matter till December 1.
The Tamil Nadu government has accused the BJP-appointed Governor of deliberately delaying the bills' clearance and scuttling the state's development by ""undermining the elected administration"".
Let's quickly discuss what the Constitution says about the role of the governor in giving assent to the bills.
When a Bill passed by the legislature of a state is presented to the Governor, the Governor has four options: (1) grant assent to the Bill; (2) withhold assent to the Bills; (3) return the Bills for reconsideration; or (4) reserve the Bill for the consideration of the President.
However, Article 200 also has a proviso which says that the Governor “may, as soon as possible” return Bills other than Money Bills, with a message requesting that the House reconsider it in parts or in whole. However, once the Legislative House reconsiders the Bill and sends it to the Governor once again, the Governor “shall not withhold assent there from”.
The proviso says the Governor must return the Bill “as soon as possible” but does not prescribe a specific timeframe which is where th conflict arises between the governors and the opposition rullled CM's.
Apart from Tamil Nadu, Kerala, Telangana, and Punjab too, have sought the intervention of the Supreme Court on the issue.
It is very interesting that such tug-of-war between the governor and the CM is only happening in opposition-ruled states. Such instances will only result in a lack of respect among the two most important authorities which is not healthy for a democracy.
Do let us know in the comments box whether you feel the governors are creating hurdles for the state government which is actually halting the development of th
Category
🗞
NewsTranscript
00:00 These bills were pending since 2020. What was he doing for 3 years?
00:05 The Supreme Court slammed Tamil Nadu Governor R N Ravi on Monday.
00:10 Let us discuss the full story but before that if you are watching this on Facebook do like our page
00:14 and if you are watching this on YouTube do subscribe to HW News English.
00:18 The Supreme Court on Monday came down heavy on Tamil Nadu Governor R N Ravi as it resumed,
00:24 hearing the Tamil Nadu government's plea against delays in clearing bills.
00:28 These bills were pending since 2020. What was he doing for 3 years?
00:34 The bench headed by Chief Justice of India D.V. Chandrachud said.
00:38 The court hearing similar pleas by the Punjab and Kerala governments also raised a point of law.
00:44 Can a Governor withhold assent on a bill without sending it back to the Assembly?
00:49 Now, what made the court slam the Tamil Nadu Governor?
00:53 The court's strong observations come days after Mr. R N Ravi returned 10 bills, two of which were
00:59 passed by the earlier AIADMK government. The Tamil Nadu Assembly then held a special session
01:05 on Saturday to re-adopt all 10 bills which were sent back to the Governor for his assent.
01:11 To which the Supreme Court said, "Assembly has passed the bills again and sent it to the
01:18 Governor. Let us see what the Governor does and the court adjourned the matter till December 1st.
01:24 The Tamil Nadu government has accused the BJP-appointed Governor of deliberately delaying
01:30 the bills, clearances and scuttling the state's development by undermining the elected administration.
01:36 Let's quickly discuss what the Constitution says about the role of the Governor in giving
01:43 assent to the bills. When a bill passed by the legislature to a state is presented to the
01:49 Governor, the Governor has four options. 1. Grant assent to the bill. 2. Withhold assent to the
01:57 bills. 3. Return the bills for reconsideration. 4. Reserve the bill for the consideration of the
02:05 President. However, Article 200 also has the proviso which says that the Governor may as soon
02:13 as possible return bills other than money bills with a message requesting that the House reconsider
02:20 it in parts or in whole. However, once the Legislative House reconsiders the bill and
02:27 sends it to the Governor once again, the Governor shall not withhold assent therefrom.
02:34 The proviso says the Governor must return the bill as soon as possible but does not prescribe
02:41 a specific time frame which is where the conflict arises between the Governors and the opposition
02:48 ruled Chief Ministers. Apart from Tamil Nadu, Kerala, Telangana and Punjab too have sought the
02:54 intervention of the Supreme Court on the issue. It is very interesting that such a tug-of-war
03:00 between the Governor and the Chief Minister is only happening in opposition ruled states.
03:05 Such instances will only result in a lack of respect among the two most important
03:11 constitutional authorities which is not healthy for a democracy. Do let us know in the comment
03:17 box whether you feel that the Governors are creating huddles for the Government which is
03:23 actually halting the development of the state. That's it for this report. For more such news
03:29 and updates subscribe to HW Newsing.
03:36 [Music]