Overview

• Chief Justice B. R. Gavai asked whether courts must remain powerless if a governor refuses to act on bills, warning that prolonged inaction can render an elected legislature defunct.
• Solicitor General Tushar Mehta argued that Articles 200 and 201 are non-justiciable for imposing deadlines, saying remedies should be political or crafted by Parliament rather than through judicial timelines.
• The bench questioned leaving a constitutional vacuum without outer limits on assent decisions and noted that the decision-making process could still face judicial review.
• The Centre criticised the April 8 Tamil Nadu ruling that set timelines and directed deemed assent, contending that Article 142 cannot substitute the President or a governor.
• Mehta concluded submissions as the advisory proceedings continued, with the court noting similar petitions from multiple states and scheduling the next hearing for August 26.