State of Tamil Nadu vs Governor of Tamilnadu

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 Supreme(SC) 626

J. B. PARDIWALA, R. MAHADEVAN
State of Tamil Nadu – Appellant
Versus
Governor of Tamilnadu – Respondent

Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner(s): Dr. Abhishek Manu Singhvi, Sr. Adv. Mr. Mukul Rohatgi, Sr. Adv. Mr. Rakesh Dwivedi, Sr. Adv. Ms. Preetika Dwivedi, Adv. Mr. Mohd. Yasir, Adv. Mr. P.wilson, Sr. Adv. Ms. Jahnavi Taneja, Adv. Mr. Sabarish Subramanian, AOR Mr. Poornachandiran R, Adv. Mr. Siddarth Seema, Adv. Mr. Vishnu Unnikrishnan, Adv. Mr. Apoorv Malhotra, Adv. Mr. Lokesh Krishna, Adv. Mr. Danish Saifi, Adv. Mr. Aravind A, Adv. Mr. Saran Raghunadhan S, Adv.
For the Respondent(s): Mr. R Venkatramani, Attorney General for India Mr. Vikramjit Banerjee, ASG Mr. Prashant Rawat, Adv. Ms. Rashi Mangal, Adv. Mr. Kartik Dey, Adv. Mr. Abhishek Goel, Adv. Mr. Kanu Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Padmesh Mishra, Adv. Mr. Arkaj Kumar, Adv. Mr. Chitvan Singhal, Adv. Mr. Raman Yadav, Adv. Mr. Abhishek Kumar Pandey, Adv. Mr. Kartikay Aggarwal, Adv. Ms. Ameya Vikrama Thanvi, Adv. Ms. Sonali Jain, Adv. Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, AOR Mr. Manoj Ranjan Sinha, Adv. Mr. Mrigank Prabhakar, AOR Mr. Vishal Agrawal, Adv. Mr. Siddharth Sahu, Adv. Ms. Madhavi Goradia Divan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Nl Rajah, Sr. Adv. Mr. S. Santanam Swaminadhan, Adv. Ms. Abhilasha Shrawat, Adv. Mr. T. Bhaskar Gowtham, Adv. Mr. D. Bharat Kumar, Adv. Mrs. Aarthi Rajan, AOR

JUDGMENT :

(J.B. PARDIWALA, J.)

For the convenience of the exposition, this judgment is divided in the following parts:

INDEX
A	A. FACTUAL MATRIX
	i. Factual background with respect to assent to bills
	ii. Factual background with respect to accord of sanction for investigation into cases of corruption against public servants
	iii. Factual background with respect to the files pertaining to premature release of prisoners
	iv. Factual background with respect to the appointments to the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission (TNPSC)
	v. Factual background with respect to dismissal of ministers and allocation of ministries
B.	SUBMISSIONS OF THE PARTIES
	i. Submissions on behalf of the Petitioner
	ii. Submissions on behalf of the Respondents
C.	ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION
D.	ASSENT TO BILLS – HISTORICAL BACKGROUND
	i. Concept of assent to bills as envisaged by certain historical documents drafted during the freedom struggle.
	ii. Debates of the Constituent Assembly on Article 200 of the Constitution
E.	ARTICLE 200 OF THE CONSTITUTION - DEVELOPMENTS POST THE COMMENCEMENT OF

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2025 Supreme(SC) 626

J. B. PARDIWALA, R. MAHADEVANState of Tamil Nadu – AppellantVersusGovernor of Tamilnadu – Respondent

Cases Referred (18)

Related Judgments

Samcar Glass Ltd. VS Commissioner of Central Exicse, Jaipur

Plastikos Packaging VS Commissioner of Central Excise, Allahabad

SYSTEMS MANUFACTURING LTD VS SYSTEMS EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION - 2000 Supreme(Kar) 665

JOGENDRA SINGH VS SURESH MANJULAPUR - 2000 Supreme(Kar) 662

MYSORE WINE PRODUCTS AND ALLIED CO. LTD. , BANGALORE VS PRESIDING OFFICER, INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL, BANGALORE - 2000 Supreme(Kar) 663

Bose VS State, rep. by Inspector of Police, Salaikiramam P. S. , - 2000 Supreme(Mad) 1273

Jain Construction Company VS State of Rajasthan - 2000 Supreme(Raj) 912

Voltas Limited VS Joint Collector, Medak - 2000 Supreme(AP) 945

STATE OF BIHAR VS SURENDRA SINGH RAUTELA ALIAS BENGALI - 2000 Supreme(Jhk) 45

Krishna Kumar VS Gulab Khan - 2000 Supreme(Raj) 1546

J. B. PARDIWALA, R. MAHADEVAN
State of Tamil Nadu – Appellant
Versus
Governor of Tamilnadu – Respondent