Manas Dasgupta
NEW DELHI, Mar 22: Rapped by the apex court, the Tamil Nadu governor RN Ravi was on Friday forced to 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 Thursday 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.
Mr Ponmudy, the senior DMK leader was re-inducted into the Tamil Nadu Cabinet on Friday with Mr Ravi administering him the oath of office and secrecy in the presence of Chief Minister M.K. Stalin in the Raj Bhavan in Chennai.
Earlier in the day, Mr Ravi approved the recommendation of Chief Minister M.K. Stalin to re-induct K. Ponmudy into the Council of Ministers and the swearing-in ceremony was scheduled at 3.30 pm on Friday, a Raj Bhavan media release said.
Mr Ponmudy is set to be allocated the Higher Education portfolio, including Technical Education, Electronics, Science and Technology that are currently held by his Cabinet colleague R.S. Rajakannappan. The swearing-in ceremony took place a day after the Supreme Court strongly viewed the action of the Governor to put on hold the induction of Mr Ponmudy into the Council of Ministers over a contention that the apex court’ stay on Mr Ponmudy was merely an interim order.
The Governor in a letter on March 17 to Mr Stalin rejected the chief minister’s recommendation to induct Mr Ponmudy into the cabinet on the ground that the Supreme Court had “only suspended, not set aside” his conviction amounted to wilful disobedience of a judicial order. Mr Ponmudy was “tainted by corruption” and that his appointment would be against “constitutional morality,” the Governor had said.
Following his conviction and sentence of three years in a disproportionate assets case, Mr Ponmudy was disqualified and lost his membership in the Assembly and thereby his posting in the Cabinet in December last year. His Thirukoyilur Assembly constituency was eventually declared vacant.
Mr Ponmudy moved the Supreme Court that granted an interim stay after which the Assembly Speaker withdrew the notification that declared Thirukoyilur as vacant. However, the Governor refused to re-induct Mr Ponmudy into the Cabinet, ignoring a recommendation by the Chief Minister.
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 diarchy,” the State had argued.
