The Supreme Court on Thursday expressed disappointment at Tamil Nadu Governor RN Ravi for refusing to re-induct MLA K Ponmudi as a minister, even after his conviction was suspended by the Supreme Court.
Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud questioned Attorney General for India R Venkataramani on Governor Ravi’s decision not to induct the DMK leader as a minister. Mentioning that Ponmudi’s conviction has been stayed, the Chief Justice asked the Attorney General how can the Governor claim that his reinduction as a minister will be against constitutional morality?
The bench of CJI DY Chandrachud, Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice Manoj Misra was hearing an application filed by the Tamil Nadu government seeking a direction to the Governor to accept the recommendation made by the Chief Minister to reappoint Ponmudi as Minister.
The bench remarked that they are seriously concerned about the conduct of the Governor in the case, adding that Ravi is defying the Supreme Court of India. The court observed that when a two-judge bench of the Supreme Court stays a conviction, the Governor has no business to tell the court that this does not wipe off the conviction and it is non-existent. Consecutively, the AG sought time till tomorrow to respond.
The Chief Justice also issued a stern warning that if the Governor does not act by tomorrow, there will be court intervention. He added that the court will not resist from passing an order directing the Governor to act as per the Constitution, asserting that it is to avoid that situation that they are giving time.
Appearing for the Tamil Nadu government, Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi contended that it was unprecedented in the 75 years history of the nation that a Governor has refused to act as per the Chief Minister’s recommendation to appoint a Minister. He further submitted that the top court had earlier passed strictures against the governor for keeping the bills pending and sending them en-masse to the President.
Meanwhile, the AG raised certain technical objections to the state’s plea for the minister’s appointment, saying that it has been moved as an interlocutory application in a pending writ petition raising a different issue. He also questioned the maintainability of the petition under Article 32, asking what fundamental right of the state has been violated.
Eventually, the Chief Justice asked if the Governor does not follow the constitution, what does the government do? The CJI then told the AG that the court can hear his arguments and pass an order today itself.