Tamil Nadu Governor RN Ravi sends Kalaignar University Bill to the President, reigniting DMK’s legal battle over delayed gubernatorial assent. Supreme Court’s timeline for Governors once again at the center of the dispute.
Chennai: On Wednesday, Tamil Nadu Governor RN Ravi decided to send the Kalaignar University Bill—which was passed by the Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly in April—to President Droupadi Murmu for her approval.
This move has brought back a serious conflict between the ruling DMK government and the Governor regarding the approval of state bills.
Also Read: Delhi University Vice-Chancellor Rejects Proposal to Include Manusmriti in Law Courses
The DMK (Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam) has strongly opposed this action, saying that the Governor’s decision to refer the bill to the President goes against the recent Supreme Court judgment which clearly set a time limit for such decisions.
As per the ruling, Governors are not allowed to send bills to the President after withholding their assent. The court had said such actions are “illegal” and “arbitrary”.
In total, two bills have now been referred to the President by Governor RN Ravi.
The first bill is the Kalaignar University Bill, which seeks to establish Kalaignar University in Kumbakonam, named after the late former Chief Minister M Karunanidhi, who was a key DMK leader.
The bill also proposes that the current Chief Minister and Karunanidhi’s son, MK Stalin, will be the first Vice Chancellor of the university.
The second bill is an amendment to the Tamil Nadu Physical Education and Sports University Act. This amendment gives power to the state government to appoint and remove the Vice Chancellor of the university.
Both bills were passed by the Tamil Nadu Assembly in April 2025 and then sent to the Governor for his assent. However, instead of giving his approval or returning the bills with reasons, the Governor chose to delay action. By withholding his assent and then sending the bills to the President, Governor RN Ravi has triggered a new wave of political and legal tensions.
Also Read: Supreme Court Appoints Ex-CJI UU Lalit to Head West Bengal Vice-Chancellor Appointments
This is not the first time the Governor and the DMK government have clashed over legislative matters. In fact, the DMK had already approached the Supreme Court in 2023 to ask for directions to be given to the Governor to clear 10 bills. These included some that were passed even during the rule of the previous AIADMK-led government.
The DMK and Chief Minister MK Stalin have repeatedly accused Governor RN Ravi—who was appointed by the BJP-led central government—of intentionally delaying state laws and creating roadblocks for governance.
The party has said that the Governor is “undermining the elected administration” and harming the development of the state.
In response to such cases, the Supreme Court made a crucial ruling in April. It said that under Article 200 of the Indian Constitution, a Governor has only three options when a bill is passed by the state legislature and presented to them:
- Give assent (approve the bill),
- Withhold assent (reject the bill), or
- Reserve the bill for the President’s consideration.
The court further made it clear that these actions must be completed within one month, adding that if the Governor takes too long, then the matter can be legally examined.
It warned that failing to act within the prescribed time would bring the Governor’s conduct under “judicial scrutiny”.
However, the Supreme Court also balanced its ruling by stating that it is “in no way undermining the Governor’s powers”.
It said that
“all actions of the Governor must align with the principle of parliamentary democracy”.
The Kalaignar University Bill is not just another law—it is also politically sensitive. Naming the university after M Karunanidhi, who was not only a long-serving Chief Minister but also a key figure in Tamil Nadu’s political and social reforms, carries huge emotional and symbolic value for the DMK and its supporters. Appointing his son, CM MK Stalin, as the first Vice Chancellor adds to its significance.
Now, with the Governor referring these bills to the President, the state must wait for further action from the central level.
This move also raises fresh constitutional questions about the limits of gubernatorial powers, the autonomy of elected state governments, and the role of the judiciary in ensuring smooth legislative procedures.
Background Of The Case
In the previous Supreme Court hearings related to the Tamil Nadu government’s petition against Governor RN Ravi, the Court addressed the issue of delay in granting assent to bills passed by the State Assembly.
The DMK-led government alleged that the Governor was intentionally withholding assent to 10 bills, thereby obstructing governance and undermining the authority of the elected government.
In its April 2024 ruling, the Supreme Court held that under Article 200 of the Constitution, a Governor has only three options — to give assent, withhold assent, or reserve the bill for the President — and these actions must be taken within a reasonable time frame.
The Court stressed that a Governor cannot first withhold assent and then later refer the bill to the President, terming such conduct “illegal” and “arbitrary.”
It laid down a timeline of one month for the Governor to act on bills, warning that failure to do so could invite judicial scrutiny. Importantly, the Court clarified,
“We are in no way undermining the Governor’s powers,”
but asserted that
“all actions of the Governor must align with the principle of parliamentary democracy.”
This judgment formed the legal backdrop for the ongoing tussle between the Tamil Nadu government and Governor RN Ravi, particularly after his recent move to reserve the Kalaignar University Bill for presidential assent.
Click Here to Read Our Reports on DMK vs Governor
