Editorial 2 : Balance is Restored
Context: SC action on TN governor is not overreach
Constitutional Challenge to Executive Inaction
- Case Examples
- Waqf (Amendment) Act 2025: Petitions filed immediately after gazette notification, reflecting urgency.
- Tamil Nadu Governor’s Inaction (2020–2025): Delay in addressing bills led to Supreme Court intervention only in 2025.
- Impact of Delayed Justice
- The bills lapse with assembly dissolution, undermining the elected government’s mandate.
- It threatens federalism if the Centre (via Governors) obstructs state legislative agendas.
Supreme Court’s Use of Article 142 for Complete Justice
- Judicial Breakthrough: Supreme Court invoked Article 142 to deem withheld bills as assented by the Governor.
- Critics allege of judicial overreach.
- Justification: Article 142 applies only where statutes/constitution are silent, not against existing provisions.
- Outcome: Tamil Nadu government notified the Acts swiftly, restoring legislative intent.
Implications for Federalism and Centre-State Relations
- Governor’s Role
- Governor is appointed by the Centre and his inaction risks becoming a tool for political obstruction.
- Example: Tamil Nadu Governor’s mala fide conduct highlighted by the Court.
- Constitutional Safeguards
- Articles 200 & 201: Do not permit a pocket veto (indefinite withholding of bills).
- Immunity Clause: Governors enjoy immunity for official acts, leaving elected governments helpless without judicial recourse.
Governor’s Accountability
- Finding of Mala Fides: Supreme Court criticized the Governor’s lack of bonafides and defiance of judicial directions.
- Remedies
- Political Accountability: Resignation demands were ignored by the Governor.
- Legal Accountability: Potential writ of quo warranto to challenge authority to hold office.
- Key Question: Can a Governor continue in office after judicial censure? This requires constitutional clarity.
Conclusion and Way Forward
- Constitution ensures democratic governance through binding, interlinked provisions.
- Supreme Court’s interpretation is final and critiques must align with rule of law or constitutional amendments.
- The ruling in The State of Tamil Nadu vs The Governor of Tamil Nadu reaffirms that constitutional principles cannot be subverted through inaction or mala fide conduct.