The Supreme Court on Monday questioned Tamil Nadu Governor RN Ravi’s decision to refer bills to the President even after the state legislature had reconsidered them and passed them a second time, Bar and Bench reported.

A bench of Justices JB Pardiwala and R Mahadevan noted that under Article 200 of the Constitution, the governor can either assent to a bill, withhold assent, or refer it to the president. However, once the governor sends the bill back to the legislature and it is passed again, it cannot be sent to the president a second time, the court emphasised.

The court reserved its judgment on petitions filed by the Tamil Nadu government challenging the governor’s refusal to decide on giving assent to several bills, including those about appointing vice chancellors to state universities.

Senior Advocate Rakesh Dwivedi, representing Tamil Nadu, told the court that bills that had been reconsidered and passed a second time by the state legislature had been sent to the President. The court then asked Attorney General R Venkataramani, representing the Tamil Nadu governor: “How can a re-passed bill be sent to the President?”

The petitions were about 10 re-enacted bills, mostly related to higher education and including provisions to remove the governor as the chancellor of state universities. The president approved one, rejected seven and left two unaddressed.

The Tamil Nadu government had moved court seeking directions to the governor and president to decide on bills passed by the legislature within a specified time frame.

During the previous hearing on February 6, the Supreme Court had questioned why the governor kept several bills pending with him for more than three years before declaring that he would withhold assent and refer some of them to the president.

The governor appeared to have “adopted his own procedure” to decide on the bills, Pardiwala had remarked.