Tamil Nadu challenges Presidential Reference in Supreme Court, calling it an “appeal in disguise” against the April verdict on Governors’ timelines for assent to state bills.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: The Tamil Nadu government has challenged the maintainability of the Presidential Reference filed by President Droupadi Murmu under Article 143(1) of the Indian Constitution. The reference, dated May 13, 2025, raises 14 questions on the powers of Governors and the President concerning assent to state bills.
However, Tamil Nadu has called the reference an “appeal in disguise” and a clear attempt to override a binding Supreme Court judgment delivered just a month earlier.
The Supreme Court’s April 2025 Verdict
On April 8, 2025, the Supreme Court, in State of Tamil Nadu vs Governor of Tamil Nadu (2025 SCC OnLine SC 770), laid down clear timelines for Governors and the President to act on state bills. The Court held that:
- A Governor must act within three months if withholding assent or reserving a bill.
- If the bill is passed again by the assembly, the Governor must act within one month.
- The prolonged inaction of the Governors was declared unconstitutional, and the Court used its extraordinary powers under Article 142 to deem ten pending bills in Tamil Nadu as assented.
This ruling was welcomed by several opposition-ruled states, which had long alleged that Governors were functioning as “political agents” of the Union government, delaying or stalling key legislation to obstruct elected governments.
Presidential Reference Under Article 143
A month later, President Murmu invoked Article 143(1), a rarely used provision, to refer 14 constitutional questions to the Supreme Court. These included:
- Whether timelines can be imposed on Governors and the President for giving assent to bills.
- Whether the Governor’s discretionary powers under Article 200 are justiciable.
- Whether judicial directions can prescribe the manner and time of exercising constitutional powers.
The reference reignited debate about the balance of power between elected state governments and constitutional heads like Governors and the President.
Tamil Nadu’s Response
In its 13-page affidavit submitted before the Constitution Bench led by Chief Justice D. Y. Chandrachud, the Tamil Nadu government firmly opposed the Presidential Reference, describing it as an “appeal in disguise” and urging the Supreme Court to declare it not maintainable.
The state contended that the reference was merely an indirect attempt to overturn the Court’s binding judgment delivered in April 2025. It argued that 13 out of the 14 questions raised in the reference had already been addressed in that ruling, leaving no new or substantial question of law to justify a fresh interpretation under Article 143.
Tamil Nadu accused the Centre of misusing the advisory jurisdiction of Article 143 as a “backdoor” method to reopen issues already settled, especially when the Governor had not filed any review or curative petition against the verdict.
Citing the 1974 judgment in Ahmedabad St. Xavier’s College Society vs. State of Gujarat, the state further asserted that opinions rendered under Article 143 are merely advisory and cannot override or act as an appeal against final judgments of the Court.
Tamil Nadu is not alone. The Kerala government had earlier filed a similar plea, also urging the Supreme Court to return the reference unanswered. Both states view the reference as an erosion of federal principles and judicial finality.
Supreme Court
On July 22, 2025, the five-judge Constitution Bench agreed to hear the reference and issued notices to the Centre and all states. It sought their responses by July 29 and has listed the matter for further hearing on August 29. The bench also made it clear that it would consider:
- Whether judicial timelines can be imposed on Governors and the President.
- Whether their discretionary powers under Articles 200 and 201 are subject to judicial review.
The Attorney General, R. Venkataramani, has been asked to assist the Court.
Click Here to Read More Reports On Presidential Reference
