Former Attorney General KK Venugopal, speaking on behalf of the Kerala government, contended that the recent ruling in the Tamil Nau Governor issue directly relates to the Kerala Governor case.
.jpg)
Attorney General (AG) R Venkataramani and Solicitor General (SG) Tushar Mehta on Tuesday opposed the Kerala government's argument that the Supreme Court's recent judgment concerning the Tamil Nadu Governor would cover a case involving allegations of undue delay by the Kerala Governor in clearing State Bills.
Remarkably, former Attorney General KK Venugopal is the principal counsel for the LDF-led Kerala government in this case. The Court did not overlook this factor today.
The Bench said, in a more lighthearted tone, "I have the habit of calling you Mr. AG whenever I see you," when speaking to Venugopal today.
Two petitions submitted by the Kerala government were being heard by the bench of Justices PS Narasimha and Joymalya Bagchi.
In 2023, a petition was brought against the then-Governor of Kerala, Arif Mohammed Khan, for his tardiness in approving bills that the State Legislature had enacted. The State informed the highest court in November of that year that up to eight bills were awaiting the governor's assent for durations varying from seven to twenty-three months.
President Droupadi Murmu's decision to not sign four of the seven legislation that State Governor Arif Mohammed Khan brought to her in 2023 was challenged in a second petition in 2024.
"Both petitions are covered by recent ruling (in Tamil Nadu Governor's case) ... on what is time limit following reference to President, that is held to be 3 months. "This raises no other questions," Senior Advocate Venugopal contended today.
Disagreeing, SG Tushar Mehta stated that he wanted to give arguments that demonstrated how the current case differed from the Tamil Nadu Governor's case.
"My lord," SG Mehta stated, "it is not covered."
Venkataramani, the attorney general, agreed with SG Mehta.
"With great respect for Mr. Venugopal, I would respectfully state that the ruling in this instance does not address several problems based on fundamentally different facts. AG Venkataramani stated, "We would like to demonstrate the differences; I will include a note."
The Kerala government is withdrawing an amendment case that was previously filed to seek specific guidance on how the Governor is expected to carry out its duties under Article 200 of the Constitution, Senior Advocate Venugopal informed the court.
Venugopal continued by saying that since the Tamil Nadu Governor's ruling addresses this aspect of the case as well, this change is no longer necessary.
In the end, the case was postponed for a follow-up hearing until May 6.
This website is all about sharing knowledge and updating everything about Law.
