Presidential Reference: Solicitor General urges SC to declare Tamil Nadu ruling ‘incorrect law’

The Supreme Court on Thursday reserved its opinion on a Presidential Reference concerning assent to Bills, after Solicitor General Tushar Mehta urged that the two-judge Tamil Nadu judgment did not lay down the correct law. The reference, made by President Droupadi Murmu, raises 14 questions, including whether timelines can be prescribed for the assent of Bills.

Mehta argued that even under its advisory jurisdiction in Article 143, the Court could declare a previous ruling incorrect without disturbing its binding effect between parties. Referring to the 2G case, he said the Court has the inherent power to revisit earlier views, countering arguments by states and interveners that the Tamil Nadu judgment had attained finality.

“There was an extreme argument that you can’t do anything about the Tamil Nadu view. Intra-party, the judgment is final. But my lordships have the jurisdiction and power to declare it not the correct law,” Mehta submitted, warning that following the ruling could trigger litigation over writs directing or preventing assent by Governors or the President.

Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for West Bengal, objected, saying the Presidential Reference does not frame any question on revisiting the Tamil Nadu case. Chief Justice BR Gavai also remarked that the Court would only answer the questions referred. Senior Advocate Arvind Datar, for Punjab, had earlier contended that the Tamil Nadu judgment was binding under Article 141.

The five-judge bench of Chief Justice BR Gavai and Justices Surya Kant, Vikram Nath, PS Narasimha and AS Chandurkar is hearing the reference, made a month after the Tamil Nadu ruling. In that case, Justices JB Pardiwala and R Mahadevan held that ten Bills re-enacted by the state assembly had “deemed assent” after the Governor withheld them and later referred them to the President.
(With LiveLaw inputs)