The Supreme expressed 'serious concern' with the conduct of Tamil Nadu governor R N Ravi.
Credit: iStock and PTI Photo
The Supreme Court on Thursday admonished Tamil Nadu Governor R N Ravi for defying its order and for not acting on the Chief Minister's request to administer the oath of minister to DMK leader K Ponmudy once again after the suspension of his conviction and sentence in a disproportionate assets case.
"We are seriously concerned with the conduct of Tamil Nadu Governor. When the SC's two-judge bench has stayed the conviction of Ponmudy, it has to be accepted and be given effect to," a bench of Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud and Justices J B Pardiwala and Manoj Misra said.
Even as Attorney General R Venkatramani objected to the manner of filing application by the state, the court said, "We did not want to say it out loud in court but we are constrained. He is defying the Supreme Court of India."
"When the Supreme Court of India stays a conviction, the Governor has no business saying otherwise. Those who have advised him have not advised him properly. Now the Governor has to be informed that when the Supreme Court of India stays a conviction, the conviction gets stayed," the bench told the A-G.
The bench further said, "Our order only has to be implemented. Are we governed by the rule of law? How can any constitution functionary say like this. Our order has to be given effect to, it is not about subjective perception about the minister etc. The Governor is a titular head and he has the power to counsel that is all."
The bench told Venkatramani that he should come back by Friday or else it would pass the order in the case.
"If we don't hear in a positive manner by tomorrow setting the Constitutional position right then we have to pass an order," the bench said.
Senior advocates A M Singhvi and P Wilson, appearing for the Tamil Nadu government, contended that this is something which would shock the conscience of the court.
The counsel said the primacy of the elected government is a part of the basic structure of the Constitution. They said the act of swearing-in has been stayed by the Governor, which has not happened in 75 years.
The A-G said the present application has been filed in an unconnected petition, which was related to the Governor not clearing the files related to legislative enactments.
"How can fundamental rights be violated by oath not being administered? What fundamental rights are violated? I have serious objection to this," he said.
In an application, the DMK government questioned the stand taken by the Governor on March 17 in his letter to the Chief Minister's missive on March 13.
The Supreme Court had on March 11 suspended the conviction of the Minister and sentence in the disproportionate assets case.
The Governor is said to have maintained that the conviction of Ponmudy has only been “suspended, not set aside” and therefore he cannot be appointed as Minister.
The state government questioned the Governor's stand questioning the suitability of Ponmudy for appointment as minister as he is “tainted of corruption” and that his appointment would be against “constitutional morality”.
"The Governor is attempting to run a parallel government and is attempting to choose minister as per his subjective assessment of suitability, which is impermissible," the plea by the state government said.
It is 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, it said.