New Delhi: Riding on the confidence of the recent Supreme Court advisory opinion that the apex court would not fix timelines for governors and the president to give their assent to state governments’ bills, President Droupadi Murmu has returned the University of Madras (Amendment) Bill to Tamil Nadu government, in what may kickoff another round of political clashes between the M.K. Stalin-led Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam government and the Narendra Modi-led Union government. With the return of the Bill that sought to empower the state government to appoint the Vice-Chancellor of University of Madras, the long running tussle between governor R.N. Ravi and the DMK government over appointment of vice-chancellors in state-run universities will likely intensify. The TN assembly had passed the bill through a voice vote in April 2022 and sent it to Ravi for his constitutional assent. However, Ravi withheld the bill for more than a year. When the Bill was readopted by the state assembly, he referred the Bill to the President. Following a plea by the TN government, the SC arrived at a landmark decision that fixed a timeline of three months for governors to give his assent. The judgement not only enhanced the state government’s administrative autonomy but also regulated the functioning of constitutional offices like the governor’s. The SC judgement came as a reprieve for state governments of Kerala, West Bengal and other opposition-ruled states that have been tussling with the Centre over alleged muzzling of its administrative powers. The SC judgment in April 2025 described the governor’s action of referring the Bill to the President as “not bona fide” and his conduct “arbitrary…and erroneous in law”. However, a five judge bench of the SC in November 2025, gave an advisory opinion, with none of the judges claiming authorship, that effectively overturned its own April judgement. The bench said that the SC cannot fix timelines for governors and the president to deal with State Bills under Article 200 and 201. However, it maintained what the April judgement had said that governors could also not use their discretionary powers for “prolonged and evasive constitutional inaction”, in what may be seen as a political bid to suppress people’s will through proposed laws passed by elected state governments. It appears that Murmu’s decision to return the Bill to the state government has been derived from the SC’s latest “advisory opinion” that has complicated the clear role that the apex court had defined for the gubernatorial and presidential offices. As far as the Chennai University bill goes, the TN higher education minister K.Ponmudy had cited the examples of Gujarat and Telangana where state governments appointed vice-chancellors but could not do so in states like TN and Kerala. The contested amendment in the Bill aims to align university governance and Tamil Nadu’s administrative powers, which includes the finance department secretary as a syndicate member of the university. The DMK government has been at the forefront of alleging Centre’s overreach in state administration, and has repeatedly accused the governor for playing a politically partisan role by delaying assent to various legislations and V-C appointments in at least 18 state universities and 10 amendment bills.