"Appeal In Disguise": Tamil Nadu To Top Court On Presidential Reference On Governor's Powers

The Tamil Nadu government has urged the Supreme Court to declare the Presidential Reference on the powers and timelines for Governors and the President to act on state bills as "not maintainable," asserting that it amounts to an "appeal in disguise" intended to overrule a constitutionally binding judgment delivered earlier this year.

In its affidavit filed before the apex court, Tamil Nadu said the 14 questions posed by President Droupadi Murmu in May 2025 - including the interpretation of Articles 200 and 201 relating to Governors and the President - have already been exhaustively answered in the Supreme Court's judgment in State of Tamil Nadu vs Governor of Tamil Nadu (2025 SCC OnLine SC 770), delivered on April 8.

The state argued that the reference - filed barely a month after that judgment - does not raise any new substantial question of law and is, in effect, a "second-guessing" of the court's earlier ruling. 

"The Presidential Reference is nothing but an attempt to disturb the settled law," the Tamil Nadu government submitted.

The state said 13 of the 14 questions have been directly or indirectly addressed in detail in the recent Supreme Court judgment which set a three-month timeline for Governors and the President to dispose of bills passed by state legislatures and clarified that neither enjoys discretionary powers in this regard. 

Tamil Nadu also emphasises that the original case was a dispute between the state and its Governor, and not with the Union government. It also criticised Question 14 in the reference which, it said, falsely assumes that the Governor is an agent of the Union government.

The state points out that the Tamil Nadu Governor has not filed a review or curative petition, and hence the Presidential Reference appears to be a "backdoor" method to overturn a final judgment.

Advisory Nature of Article 143: Referring to past judgments, the state reminded the court that opinions under Article 143 (Presidential Reference) are advisory and not binding, and cannot override or sit in appeal over prior verdicts of the court.

Misuse of Constitutional Provision: The affidavit warned that permitting such references would set a dangerous precedent where the President could be used to undermine the Supreme Court's final decisions.

Tamil Nadu has sought the apex court to:

Declare the Presidential Reference dated May 13 as not maintainable.
Return the reference unanswered.
Dismiss the attempt to reopen settled legal positions already adjudicated.
Amid allegations of the Tamil Nadu Governor deliberately delaying assent to bills passed by the state assembly and wilfully referring bills passed twice to the President, the top court used its powers and deemed them to have been given assent. This was a problem raised by several opposition ruled states, alleging Governors acted as BJP agents and created obstacles undermining elected governments.