Tamil Nadu Governor R.N. Ravi on Friday set aside his reservations in the name of “constitutional morality” against swearing in K. Ponmudy as State Minister, a day after Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud slammed him for “defying the Supreme Court”.
The Governor had invited the apex court’s ire on March 21 by declining to administer the oath of office to Mr. Ponmudy despite an apex court order, on March11, suspending his conviction in a disproportionate assets case.
A three-judge Bench led by Chief Justice Chandrachud had given the Governor overnight to correct his course.
On Friday, Attorney General R. Venkataramani said the Governor had thought through the affair and decided to invite Mr. Ponmudy to be sworn in.
Mr. Venkataramani clarified that the Governor had no intention to disregard any orders of the Supreme Court.
“His views were based on certain understanding of certain judgments of this court,” the Attorney General assured the court.
Senior advocate P. Wilson, for the State, cut to the chase by submitting that “parliamentary democracy survives because of the Supreme Court”. He informed the court that the swearing-in has been scheduled at 3.30 pm on March 22.
Senior advocate AM Singhvi, for Tamil Nadu, asked why “better sense prevails after the State approaches the Supreme Court”.
“Should we come to the Supreme Court everytime now?” Mr. Singhvi asked about the Governor’s conduct.
In its short order, the court recorded that “the Governor of Tamil Nadu is inviting Mr. Ponmudy for being sworn in as Minister of the State government pursuant to a request made by the Chief Minister. The court is apprised of the fact that the swearing-in is scheduled to take place today”.
On March 21, the Supreme Court Bench had made it plain to the Governor that it was seriously concerned about the conduct of the Governor in this case.
“He (Governor) is defying the Supreme Court of India… When a two-judge Bench of the Supreme Court stayed the conviction of Ponmudy, the Governor had no business to tell us that the suspension order did not wipe out the conviction,” Chief Justice Chandrachud had addressed Mr. Venkataramani.
The Governor had replied to the Chief Minister that the apex court’s suspension of the conviction of Mr. Ponmudy did not wipe out the fact that he had earlier been found guilty of an offence involving moral turpitude by the Madras High Court.
The court had given the Governor overnight to “set the constitutional position right”.
The State had argued that the Governor had no individual discretion in the appointment of a State Minister and suitability of the candidate and had to follow the advice of the Chief Minister-led State Cabinet under Article 164 (1) of the Constitution.
“It is well settled that when it comes to appointment of a Minister, the suitability of the person to be appointed is assessed only by the Chief Minister, who alone has sole discretion. It is now well settled that a Governor cannot decide who should be a Minister on moral grounds or any other grounds. That sole prerogative is with the Chief Minister,” the State had contended.
The State had argued that Governor Ravi was in clear contempt of the Supreme Court order of March 11, which had suspended the conviction of Mr. Ponmudy specifically for the reason that he should not suffer disqualification under the Representation of People Act from holding office of Minister or MLA.
“The Governor cannot act as a super appellate authority. He is bound by the orders of the Supreme Court. The Governor is attempting to run a parallel government or dyarchy,” the State had argued.
