Supreme Court judge Justice BV Nagarathna on Saturday expressed concern over the recent ‘trend’ of State Governors becoming a point of litigation due to their actions and omissions with regard to State Bills and other matters.
Speaking at the Courts and The Constitution Conference organised by NALSAR University in Hyderabad, Justice Nagarathna said that bringing the actions or omissions of the Governor of a state for consideration before constitutional courts was not a healthy trend under the Constitution.
Calling the office of Governor a serious Constitutional post, Justice Nagarathna said that the Governors must discharge their duties under the Constitution in accordance with Constitution, so that this kind of litigation before the courts could be reduced.
She added that it was quite embarrassing for the Governors to be told to do or told not do a thing, noting that they must act in accordance with the Constitution.
The top court of the country recently flayed 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 in a disproportionate assets case.
On March 21, 2024, the Bench of Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice Manoj Misra said that they were seriously concerned about the conduct of the Governor in the case, adding that RN Ravi was clearly defying the Supreme Court of India.
It further observed that when a two-judge Bench of the top court had stayed a conviction, the Governor has no business to tell the court that this does not wipe off the conviction and it is non-existent. Eventually, the Apex Court directed the Governor to take action within 24 hours.
The Apex Court had, November 2023, pulled up the Governors of Kerala, Punjab and Tamil Nadu for delaying Bills passed by their respective State Legislatures.
Calling it a matter of very serious concern, the Apex Court told Punjab Governor Banwarilal Purohit, Tamil Nadu Governor R.N. Ravi and Kerala Governor Arif Mohammad Khan not to deflect the course of bills passed by a duly elected Assembly.
Noting that India has been running on established traditions and conventions, which needed to be followed, the Bench said if the Governors behaved in such a way, then how could India remain to be a parliamentary democracy.