Unconstitutional and Dangerous: The Governor's Move Threatens the Federal Structure

Unconstitutional and Dangerous: The Governor's Move Threatens the Federal Structure

The recent dismissal of a Minister in the Council of Ministers of Tamil Nadu by the Governor has raised concerns about the constitutional authority and role of the Governor in the Indian federal structure. This action, carried out without the recommendation of the Chief Minister (CM) and subsequently put on hold, has the potential to set a dangerous precedent and destabilize state governments. In this article, we will examine the reasons why the Governor's move is considered dangerous and unconstitutional. By analyzing the constitutional provisions, historical context, judicial interpretations, and implications for the federal structure, we aim to shed light on the potential consequences of such actions.

 

I. Against the Spirit of Federal Structure

The Governor's dismissal of a Minister, despite the government enjoying an absolute majority in the State legislature, without the CM's recommendation, poses a threat to the federal structure of India. The federal system relies on a clear division of powers between the central government and the state governments, with the latter enjoying a certain level of autonomy. The dismissal of a Minister by the Governor without consulting the CM undermines the principles of federalism and risks destabilizing state governments.

 

II. Unconstitutional Move

The dismissal of a Minister without the knowledge and recommendation of the CM is not only dangerous but also unconstitutional. The Governor's letter invoked Articles 153, 163, and 164 of the Constitution. However, the constitutional scheme outlined in these articles does not grant discretionary powers to the Governor regarding the appointment and removal of ministers, which fall under the CM's domain. The Governor's unilateral removal of a Minister based on the pretext that his earlier advice to dismiss the Minister was disregarded would be a constitutional misadventure.

 

III. Clarity on Governor's Power: Governor has "No Discretion" to Dismiss a Minister

To understand the constitutional framework surrounding the Governor's power, we must delve into the relevant articles. Article 164 of the Constitution states that the CM is appointed by the Governor without any advice, implying that the Governor cannot appoint an individual Minister at his discretion. Logically, this suggests that the Governor can dismiss a Minister only on the advice of the CM. The discretion to choose and remove Ministers lies solely with the CM, who is accountable to the people. The Constitution does not transfer the CM's discretion to the Governor.

 

IV. Understanding the Governor's Power in Colonial Era and in the Present Context

To grasp the evolution of the Governor's power, it is crucial to examine the historical context. During the colonial era, the Governor had absolute discretion to choose and dismiss Ministers under the Government of India Act 1935. However, in independent India, the Governor became a mere constitutional head, acting on the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers headed by the CM. B.R. Ambedkar, a key architect of the Constitution, explicitly stated that there is no executive function that the Governor can perform independently under the Constitution. Consequently, choosing and dismissing Ministers are no longer within the Governor's discretion.

 

V. The Pleasure Doctrine

The pleasure doctrine, derived from the Government of India Act 1935, was incorporated into the Constitution of India. However, when Article 164 was drafted, the words "chosen," "dismissal," and "discretion" were omitted, indicating that the Constitution did not confer any discretion on the Governor to choose or dismiss individual Ministers. Judicial clarifications through landmark cases such as Mahabir Prasad Sharma (1968), Pratapsing Raojirao Rane (1999), Shamsher Singh vs State of Punjab (1974), and Nabam Rebia vs Deputy Speaker (2017) further emphasize the limited nature of the Governor's discretionary powers.

 

The dismissal of a Minister by the Governor of Tamil Nadu without the CM's advice is constitutionally flawed and poses a threat to the federal structure of India. Despite the subsequent suspension of the dismissal order for legal consultation, the issue itself highlights the potential destabilization of the constitutional system. By examining constitutional provisions, historical context, judicial interpretations, and the implications for the federal structure, it becomes evident that the Governor's move is dangerous and unconstitutional. It is imperative to maintain the integrity of the federal system and uphold the principles of accountability and division of powers between the central and state governments.

Thank You