The 129th Constitutional Amendment Bill, 2024 proposes Article 82A to enable simultaneous Lok Sabha and State Assembly elections. Supporters cite cost savings, efficiency, and policy continuity, but the plan raises serious constitutional and federal concerns. Aligning terms could mean cutting short or extending legislative tenures, undermining democratic accountability. Allowing the Election Commission to defer polls without Article 356 weakens federal safeguards. While administrative benefits are real, unchecked deferment powers risk legal challenges and erode neutrality. Lasting reform requires phased implementation, broad consensus, and strict safeguards. Efficiency must not trump democratic principles or citizens’ right to regular elections.
The Supreme Court’s April 2025 ruling in State of Tamil Nadu v. Governor of Tamil Nadu ended the misuse of “pocket veto” by Governors. It held that Article 200 doesn’t allow indefinite inaction and set clear timelines—one month for assent and three months for reconsideration—strengthening State legislatures’ authority and federal balance. By invoking Article 142 to deem delayed Bills as assented, the Court prevented democratic paralysis. While some critics call this judicial overreach, the ruling reinforces accountability and aligns with global democratic practices. It ensures Governors act constitutionally, not politically, safeguarding federalism and legislative primacy.
The Supreme Court has issued notice on Tamil Nadu’s plea challenging the Madras High Court’s interim stay on amendments that shifted the power to appoint Vice Chancellors from the Governor to the State Government. A bench of Justices P.S. Narasimha and R. Mahadevan tagged the case with similar pending matters and allowed the State to seek early hearing. The amendments were challenged for allegedly conflicting with UGC Regulations, which vest appointment powers in the Chancellor. The case raises key questions on federal powers and university governance.
