The Supreme Court on Thursday decided to examine whether governors have unbridled powers to withhold bills indefinitely.

The DMK government in Tamil Nadu is locked in a legal tangle with governor R.N. Ravi over his decision to withhold at least 12 bills passed by the Assembly following amendments.

“You need to show us factually on what basis and material before him did the governor withhold assent,” a bench of Justices J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan told attorney-general R. Venkataramani during the hearing.

The bench was dealing with a petition filed by the state government challenging the refusal of the governor to clear 12 bills pending before him, some of them for over three years.

The court also asked the attorney-general why the governor had sent two of the bills for the consideration of the President.

The bench noted that under Article 200 of the Constitution, the governor can withhold a bill for reconsideration but once it is passed again by the legislature, the governor cannot hold on to it further.

“The Tamil Nadu governor seems to have devised his own procedure. He has rendered the second part of the proviso redundant,” Justice Pardiwala, heading the bench, told Venkataramani.

Article 200 puts certain limitations on the power of the governor vis-à-vis the grant of assent to bills.

The apex court framed for consideration some questions related to the governor’s powers on bills and posted the matter for further hearing on Friday.