Tamil Nadu Takes Supreme Court Action Against Governor's Bill Referral: Constitutional Battle Over University Governance

Chennai:

The Tamil Nadu government has escalated its ongoing dispute with Governor RN Ravi by filing a petition in the Supreme Court on Wednesday. The state is challenging what it terms the Governor's "illegal and unconstitutional" decision to refer the Tamil Nadu Physical Education and Sports University (Amendment) Bill, 2025 to the President rather than granting his assent.

In its writ petition submitted through the Chief Secretary, the state has named the Governor, the Union of India, and the University Grants Commission (UGC) as respondents. The petition seeks a declaration that the Governor's action of reserving the Bill for Presidential consideration is "patently unconstitutional, violative of Articles 163(1) and 200 of the Constitution, and void ab initio."

The Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly unanimously passed the Bill on April 29, 2025. The legislation aims to transfer the power to appoint and remove the Vice-Chancellor of the Tamil Nadu Physical Education and Sports University from the Governor to the State Government. The government maintains that this legislation falls within the Concurrent List (Entry 25), making it within the State Legislature's authority.

According to the petition, the Bill was transmitted to the Governor for assent on May 6, 2025, accompanied by the Chief Minister's recommendation for approval. However, on July 14, Governor Ravi referred the Bill to the President, claiming conflicts with Clause 7.3 of the UGC Regulations, 2018 – an action the State argues exceeds his constitutional mandate.

The state's plea contends that the Governor has effectively "converted Raj Bhavan into a constitutional court" by questioning the Bill's legality and has usurped powers properly reserved for the judiciary. It argues that under Article 200, the Governor possesses no discretionary powers except in cases specifically requiring Presidential assent.

The petition also challenges the validity of Clause 7.3 of the UGC Regulations, describing it as "ultra vires of the UGC Act, 1956 and beyond the Union's legislative competence." The State has requested an interim injunction preventing the Union and UGC from processing the Bill and has sought an order directing them to return it to the Governor for assent.

This legal challenge emerges in the context of the Supreme Court's landmark judgment on April 8, 2025, which established that Governors must dispose of bills within a maximum period of three months. The Court ruled that the Tamil Nadu Governor had no discretionary authority to indefinitely delay or reserve Bills passed by the State Legislature.

In that judgment, the Court determined that ten Bills that had been pending with Governor RN Ravi for extended periods and were subsequently re-enacted by the Assembly would be considered to have received assent from their re-passage date.

Shortly after the State notified these laws – several of which limited the Governor's role in appointing Vice-Chancellors – the Madras High Court stayed their implementation, citing potential conflict with UGC Regulation 7.3 (2018).

The High Court noted that the matter required thorough constitutional examination, thereby initiating another round of legal conflict between the Raj Bhavan and the State government over control of State universities.

The Raj Bhavan in Chennai has yet to issue a response to this latest development.

This dispute occurs amid broader allegations from opposition-ruled states that the BJP-led central government uses Governors to create obstacles, undermining elected state governments and functioning as a parallel administration.

The BJP has consistently denied these allegations.