The row over Governor Banwarilal Purohit’s “review of works and interactions with officials” in Coimbatore has not subsided with Ministers and BJP leaders continuing to defend Mr. Purohit and Opposition leaders criticising him.
Cooperation Minister Sellur K Raju in Madurai said that as the Governor was a Member of Parliament earlier, his visit should be seen as a mark of “his enthusiasm” that he “had developed” as a representative of the people.
Tamilisai Soundararajan, president of the State unit of the Bharatiya Janata Party, recalls that when Mr. Purohit was the Assam Governor (August 2016-September 2017), he had not only supervised the administration of relief measures but also took steps to get immediate financial assistance from the Centre.
Pointing out that the role of Governor was to “advise and counsel” the State government, H. Raja, BJP’s national secretary, said that when the Governor came to know instances of corruption [while carrying out his visits and interaction with officials], he could “very well counsel” the government. In this regard, Mr Raja, a former legislator of Karaikudi, alleged the prevalence of corruption in the implementation of individual toilets construction scheme and free distribution of dhotis and sarees schemes in his district of Sivaganga.
Subhash C. Kashyap, constitutional expert and former Secretary General of Lok Sabha, says that it is a “question of relationship” between a Governor and a Council of Ministers. Any advice rendered by the Council of Ministers to the Governor cannot even be “challenged” in a court of law. If Chief Minister or the Council of Ministers is not opposed to the Governor’s actions, “it is presumed that he [Governor] is doing it with their [Chief Minister and the Ministers] consent.”
He adds that it is “for the Chief Minister or the Ministers to make an issue” if the Governor is overstepping his boundaries.
Explaining the importance of the office of Governor as explained by the General Clauses Act, M. G. Devesahayam, former civil servant, points out that as a matter of principle, one could not oppose Governor’s visit to any place or interaction with officials and others. The only condition is that he “should not and need not” make a public display of his actions as this may cause embarrassment to the elected government.
Recalling the days when he served the Haryana government in late 1960s and 1970s, Mr. Devesahayam says that the then Governor, B,N. Chakraborty, who was an officer of the Indian Civil Service during the British Raj, had reviewed the progress of development works.
Not impressed
However, a senior leader of the All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (Amma, Puratchi Thalaivi Amma) and Ramanathapuram Member of Parliament, A. Anwhar Raajhaa, was not impressed with the arguments adduced in favour of Governor.
Though there was nothing wrong in the Governor launching schemes or visiting places to see what is happening, Mr. Raajhaa suspects that Mr. Purohit’s actions were a prelude to the execution of the BJP’s slogan of “one nation, one language, one government.” He questions the need for the Governor to come out with a statement that he would visit all districts and refers to Mr Raja’s observations on corruption.
Asked whether the perception in certain quarters regarding vacuum in governance justified the Governor’s Coimbatore visit, the MP said that Chief Minister Edappadi K Palaniswami was doing his work “very well” and this was “evident” when he handled the situation recently following a heavy rain spell in certain coastal districts of the State. “Besides, it is for people to take a call at the time of Assembly elections if they feel that their Chief Minister is not living up to their expectations.”
