The Supreme Court on Friday advised the Tamil Nadu government to await the outcome of the Presidential Reference before proceeding with its plea challenging Governor RN Ravi’s decision to refer the Tamil Nadu Physical Education and Sports University (Amendment) Bill, 2025 to the President instead of granting his assent.
A bench comprising Chief Justice BR Gavai and K Vinod Chandran stated that the matter would be heard after the Constitution bench delivers its judgment on the related issue.
"You will have to wait for the outcome of the Presidential Reference. You will have to wait hardly for four weeks. The reference has to be decided before November 21st [Chief Justice Gavai’s retirement]," the bench told the state's counsel.
The apex court had previously reserved its judgement on the Presidential Reference on September 11. This reference asks whether a Constitutional court can impose timelines for Governors and the President to assent to Bills passed by state legislatures.
During the hearing, senior advocate Abhishek Singhvi, appearing for Tamil Nadu, argued that the Governor cannot refer the Bill to the President after receiving the "aid and advice" of the council of ministers.
In contrast, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta informed the bench that the total number of references made by all Governors across the country between 2015 and 2025 stands at 381. He contended that if such decisions were to be subject to judicial review, the Supreme Court would require two permanent benches to decide these issues. Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, also for the state, countered that the fundamental question was whether the Governor was entitled to examine every clause of a Bill like a judge.
The Tamil Nadu government in its plea before the top court has said the governor's act of reserving the Bill for the President's consideration is "patently unconstitutional, violative of Articles 163(1) and 200 of the Constitution, and void ab initio." According to the petition, the Bill was sent to the governor for assent on May 6, 2025, along with the chief minister's advice to approve it. However, the Governor referred the Bill to the President on July 14, and alleged conflicts with Clause 7.3 of the UGC Regulations, 2018— a move the State says exceeds its constitutional authority.
Also read: Supreme Court to hear Bihar SIR case on Nov 4
Follow us
