Prosecutor General R. Venkataramani. File | Photo Credit: PTI
Prosecutor General R. Venkataramans on Tuesday (August 19, 2025) submitted before a bench with five judges headed by the chief judge of India Br Gavai that the authority of the Governor to detain the proposed state legislation is the act independent of the ministers council.
Mr. Venkataramani said that the governor in such cases is acting outside the help and advice of the Council, and even unlike the mandate of the House/Council of Ministers.
“The authority necessarily to withhold personal independent judgment, led by the settled principles of laws,” said Mr. Venkataraman, who represented his Constitutional Office for the General Prosecutor in India.
He referred to the constitutional changes of the Constitution after the 17th century, which modified the duties of the President, but left the role of the governor largely intact.
“42. The amendment was made by Article 74 (1) expressly that the President” … will act in accordance with the “Cabinet Council.
He pointed out that the governor could not be expected to be bound by the Council of the Chamber of Deputies, if it was found that the proposed state law was unconstitutional.
Interestingly, Mr. Vencataramans referred to Article 145 (3) of the Constitution to notice that the Supreme Court’s divisional bench, headed by JB Pardediwala, should advance to Governor Tamil Nadu on the constitutional bench at least five judges.
He argued that he urged two judges for a reference to the constitutional bench as a case concerning the powers and the discretion of Governor Tamil Nadu included essential legal issues.
In addition, the judge of PS Narasimha responded that it was not a mandate to include a substantial question of the law or constitutional interpretation, which should be transferred to the bench of the Constitution pursuant to Article 145 (3).
The Venkataramans justified the presidential legacy and said that in the absence of an “authoritarian statement” or “convincing authorities” on an important question of constitutional interpretation, it would only be for the Pardiwal bench ceded the case of Tamil Nadu to the five -purpose bench.
The justice of Narasimha reminded Mr. Vencataramani that judges can also think of the presidential bench polyvocally.
Published – August 19, 2025 21:54
