NEW DELHI: The Kerala government has approached the Supreme Court contending the Presidential reference on the timeline to clear the Bills passed by state legislatures should be returned "unanswered" on the ground that it was not "maintainable" and that it has been filed by "suppressing material facts" that the issues raised over there have already been settled.
In an application, the LDF government contended that the foundation of the reference is that Article 200 does not stipulate any timeframe upon the Governor for the exercise of his powers and functions thereunder.
"This is amazing, and it is difficult to believe that the Council of Ministers, in advising the President, have not even cared to read the proviso to Article 200 which states that the Governor shall act “as soon as possible after the presentation to him of the Bill for assent”," the plea said.
In its 13-page interlocutory application, Kerala stated that there is a timeline in Article 200 stands settled by no less than three separate judgments of this court, including in the State of Telangana Vs Secretary to her Excellency the Hon’ble Governor for the State of Telangana, (2023), and State of Punjab Vs Principal Secretary to the Governor of Punjab (2023), and the State of Tamil Nadu Vs the Governor of Tamil Nadu, (2025).
"If the reference itself is based on an erroneous statement, the entirety of the reference, which mainly relates to the time factor, should stand rejected," it said.
The application also stated that the reference suppresses the single important aspect, namely, that the first 11 out of the 14 queries raised are directly covered by a judgment of the Supreme Court in the State of Tamil Nadu Vs the Governor of Tamil Nadu, delivered on April 08, 2025, merely one month before the reference was made on May 13, 2025.
"These questions 1 to 11 are no longer res integra and the instant reference seeks to use the jurisdiction of this court under Article 143 to invest in the Supreme Court an appellate jurisdiction to overrule its own judgment, which is wholly impermissible," the state government said.
The state government also said that a reference under Article 143 cannot result in the Supreme Court overruling the findings of law and fact delivered in the earlier judgments, but it can only clarify aspects where there is a doubt. The instant reference is thus a serious misuse of the power under Article 143 of the Constitution.
"If the basic foundation is tainted and the majority of the questions are directed to the Supreme Court to overrule its judgments, the fact that there are two or three additional questions would not require the Court to answer any one of the questions," it said.
The state also said the judgment, having not been assailed or set aside in any validly constituted proceedings, has attained finality and is binding on all concerned under Article 141.
"The said judgment cannot be challenged obliquely in collateral proceedings such as in the instant reference. The President and the Council of Ministers have to act in aid of the Supreme Court under Article 144. Under the Constitution this court cannot sit in appeal over its own judgments, nor can such a power be vested in it by the President under Article 143," it said.
The reference loses its legitimacy and seeks to mislead the court into setting aside its own judgment, which has been suppressed.
There are "serious lacunae" in the reference which failed to mention that it really sought to overrule undisclosed judgments of the Supreme Court, and by misinterpreting Article 200, by misstating that no timeline has been fixed by Article 200, it contended.
On July 22, the Supreme Court had issued notice to the Centre and all state governments on the presidential reference related to prescribing timelines for Governors and the President to act on bills passed by the legislative assembly of a state.
The reference came after the April 8, 2025 judgment in the case of Tamil Nadu.
Hearing the reference, a special bench led by CJI Gavai and comprising Justices Surya Kant, Vikram Nath, P S Narasimha and Atul S Chandurkar had said the issue would affect the entire country.
The court said, it will begin the hearing in the matter in August.
