Not even President enjoys absolute veto, rules Supreme Court

The Supreme Court judgment which has laid down a timeline for both state governors and the President of India to decide on legislations passed by state assemblies is already being questioned.

It is judicial overreach, excessive interference, and two Supreme Court judges cannot amend the Constitution, fumed Kerala governor Rajendra Vishwanath Arlekar today, 12 April in multiple interviews. Why do we have Parliament, he sarcastically asked. Even some lawyers questioned the judgment and wondered if the Supreme Court would now prescribe a timeline for courts to deliver judgments.

Meanwhile, the Tamil Nadu government lost no time in notifying the Bills which the governor had stalled and to which the President had withheld her assent, on Saturday. This was historic because this is the first time that legislations have been notified in the country following the Supreme Court’s ruling rather than approval by the governor and President.

History scripted, for the first time, Acts were notified without the assent of the Governor but with the order of the SC.

Tamil Nadu Government waited for the judgment to the be uploaded to notify the Acts.

Sources say, CM as Chancellor of Universities will convene the meeting… pic.twitter.com/0jN4TvugcN

— Arvind Gunasekar (@arvindgunasekar) April 12, 2025

The Tamil Nadu assembly had passed 10 Bills between January 2020 and December 2022, but they remained pending for approval by the governor. Although incumbent governor R.N. Ravi assumed office in November 2021, he sat on the Bills until October 2023 when the state government approached the Supreme Court and challenged the delaying tactics.

The governor promptly returned the 10 Bills with the cryptic note, “I withhold my consent”. The state government retaliated by holding a special assembly session which once again passed the Bills without any material change. When the Bills were sent back to the governor, he was bound to give his assent under Article 200 of the Constitution and return the Bills to the government.

Supreme Court sets timelines even for the President of India to decide on Bills reserved by the Governor for Presidential assent.

The President of India can’t exercise ‘absolute veto’ or ‘pocket veto’ on bills.

The President must decide on reserved Bills within 3 months. State… https://t.co/mM5wjWCTVQ pic.twitter.com/wGst6ZF0mW

— Live Law (@LiveLawIndia) April 12, 2025

The governor, however, referred all 10 Bills to the President in November 2023. Subsequently, the President gave her assent to one of the 10, refused assent to seven, and took no decision on the remaining two.

In their ruling on 8 April, Justices J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan declared the action of the governor as ‘illegal’ and erroneous. The justices held that though the Constitution does not provide a specific timeline, both governors and the President are expected to take decisions within a reasonable time, that they cannot sit over decisions indefinitely.

The Court held that like the governor, even the President can also not exercise "absolute veto" by indefinitely sitting over Bills. The apex court further held that the President is under obligation to declare reasons for the decision which must be communicated to the state government. If a Bill is reserved on the ground of unconstitutionality, the court suggested, then the President ought to seek the Supreme Court's advice as per Article 143 of the Constitution.

"…We have elaborated that the Governor does not hold the power to exercise 'absolute veto' on any bill, (and) we see no reason why the same standard would also not apply to the President under Article 201 as well. The President is not an exception to this default rule which permeates throughout our Constitution. Such unbridled powers cannot be said to remain in either of these constitutional posts," stated the judgment authored by Justice Pardiwala.

Pursuant to the order of the Hon. SC the Tamil Nadu Government has notified the 10 Acts on the Government Gazette and they come into force!

History is made as these are the first Acts of any legislature in India to have taken effect without the signature of the Governor /… https://t.co/X86hh7bRT9 pic.twitter.com/nSGy3qjcvC

— P. Wilson (@PWilsonDMK) April 12, 2025

Advocate P. Wilson posted on Saturday, on X, “History is made as these are the first Acts of any legislature in India to have taken effect without the signature of the Governor / President but on the strength of the judgement of the Supreme Court!” 

‘The Supreme Court sets timelines even for the President of India to decide on Bills reserved by the Governor for Presidential assent. The President of India cannot exercise ‘absolute veto’ or ‘pocket veto’ on bills. The President must decide on reserved Bills within 3 months. State govt can file writ petition seeking mandamus against President if there is default. If President doesn’t declare reasons, presumption of lack of bona fides arises’, reported Live Law.

The Tamil Nadu government has notified the operation of 10 Acts, which the Supreme Court declared as "deemed" to have been assented to by governor Ravi in view of the governor's prolonged delay in clearing them and his unconstitutional reference to the President. The notification was issued by the government after the Supreme Court uploaded the judgment late on Friday, 11 April.