Actions of the Governors and the President are subject to judicial review

  1. Home
  2. /
  3. Publications
  4. /
  5. Case Snippets
  6. /
  7. Actions of the...

The Hon’ble Supreme Court, while dealing with a Writ Petition filed by the State of Tamil Nadu, held that the Governor cannot keep bills submitted to them pending without response indefinitely. The Court also held that delays in granting assent to bills that were repassed by the legislature, without any reason are both illegal and erroneous in law, and to put an end to the dispute, it also prescribed various timelines to be followed for the grant of assent and prevent arbitrary delays. The Court also stated that actions of Governors and the President are subject to judicial review as absence of the would shield their actions “in a lead casket” even in cases of constitutional violation.

Tags:

Let us help you!

If you need any help, please feel free to contact us. We will get back to you within one business day. Alternatively, if you're in a hurry, you can call us now

+91 9052538538
info@karavadi.in

Recent Case Snippets

Decoding Section 127: Procedural Safeguards and Judicial Perspectives on Tax Case Transfers

Jurisdiction in tax assessment matters often appears to be a rigid framework governed by territorial boundaries. However, Section 127 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, introduces a dynamic mechanism that allows for the transfer of cases between assessing authorities to facilitate better administration. This article delves into... Read more »

Rohan Builders (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Berger Paints India Ltd, 2024 INSC 686

2024 INSC 686 – Rohan Builders (India) Pvt. Ltd. vs. Berger Paints India Ltd.: In this judgment, the Supreme Court of India addressed whether an application for extending the time period for passing an arbitral award under Section 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, can be filed after the expiry of the stipulated... Read more » Read more »

Fayaz Ahmad Sheikh Vs. Mushtaq Ahmad Khan, 2022 Scc Online J&K 565

The court observed that, a complaint under section 138 of NI Act, when an FIR of offences under section 420, 560 IPC was already filed with respect to circumstances of identical nature/ same transaction does not amount to forum shopping or double jeopardy. The offence under section 420 IPC is made during the issuance of... Read more » Read more »

Disclaimer

The Rules and Regulations set forth by the Bar Council of India under Advocates Act, 1961 prohibit Advocates or Law Firms from advertising or soliciting work through public domain communications. This website is intended solely to provide information. Karavadi & Associates (“K&A”) does not aim to advertise or solicit clients through this platform. K & A disclaim any responsibility for decisions made by readers/visitors based solely on the content of this website.

By clicking 'AGREE,' readers/visitors agree and acknowledge that the information provided herein (a) does not constitute advertising or solicitation, and (b) is intended solely for their understanding of K & A services. By continuing to use this site, you consent to the use of cookies on your device as outlined in our Cookie Policy.