Voices. Verdicts. Vision

Voices. Verdicts. Vision

Presidential Reference Day 5 : SC Questions Maintainability of Article 32 Petitions by States Against Governor/President

(SPL. REF. No. 1/2025 XVII, dated August 28, 2025)

Article 32 Maintainability

The Supreme Court of India on August 28, 2025, heard a Presidential Reference regarding whether a State Government can file writ petitions under Article 32 against the Union Government or the Governor. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta submitted that the State does not possess fundamental rights and cannot invoke Article 32, which protects such rights. He argued that disputes between the Union and States must be resolved under Article 131, and that writs under Article 226 cannot lie against the Governor, who acts under the aid and advice of the State Cabinet. The SG also noted that Mandamus cannot be issued to the Governor or the President, and judicial direction on the timing of assent to Bills would be impermissible.

Senior Adv. Siddharth Luthra, representing the State of Andhra Pradesh, opposed the Union’s submissions, arguing that the State can invoke Article 32 in certain circumstances to protect citizens’ fundamental rights, particularly where inaction by the Governor or President impacts legislative functioning. He also sought clarity on the interpretation of provisions in Articles 200 and 201, including the Governor’s discretion to reserve Bills, the use of “may” versus “shall,” and issues of repugnancy with central laws. The bench explored whether a writ could be filed on behalf of the State and the scope of Article 361, noting that judicial intervention in the assent process is limited.

The Court observed that Article 361 interpretations relate to the President and Governor, not directly to Articles 111, 200, or 201. The Governor acts as a vital link between the State and Union, balancing national and State policy considerations. The SG emphasized that the State, as a repository of citizens’ rights, cannot file Article 32 petitions independently, and judicial review of assent would render Article 361 ineffective. The hearing concluded, and the Court directed that the matter will resume on September 2, 2025.


Appearances :

• Solicitor General of India: Tushar Mehta (representing the Union/President)

• Senior Advocate Manu K. Singhvi: representing the State of Tamil Nadu

• Senior Advocate Siddharth Luthra: representing the State of Andhra Pradesh

One thought on “Presidential Reference Day 5 : SC Questions Maintainability of Article 32 Petitions by States Against Governor/President

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *