It all began with the Tamil Nadu government approaching the Supreme Court, accusing the Governor RN Ravi of almost causing a constitutional deadlock by not taking action on Bills and files sent to him.
On November 10, the Supreme Court expressed serious concern over the actions of the Governor, and issued notice to the Home Ministry to respond. This is where things took a curious turn. In three days, Mr Ravi returned 10 bills to the Assembly, by merely stating ‘I withhold assent’, without giving any reason. This was unprecedented. In an equally unprecedented reaction, the government placed all 10 bills in a special session of the Assembly on November 18 and readopted them and sent them back to Mr Ravi.
The Supreme Court has orally observed on November 20 that perhaps now the Governor may have no option but to give assent to these bills.
This case would provide a crucial opportunity to settle a critical constitutional question on whether a Bill for which assent has been withheld by the Governor can indeed be considered as his “dead” as claimed by Mr Ravi some months ago. And also whether a Bill for which assent has been withheld by the Governor could be readopted by the Assembly as in the case of Bills that are returned for reconsideration.
Why did the Governor keep the Bills pending but claim in May that no Bills are pending in Raj Bhavan? Also, is the sanction for prosecuting former AIADMK Ministers politically motivated?
Presentation and script: D. Suresh Kumar
Production: Shibu Narayan
Videography: Thamodharan Bharath
