Sasikala vs OPS: Legal options available for governor
Here we look into the legal options available for Tamil Nadu Governor Vidyasagar Rao to deal with the political crisis in the state.
Chennai, Feb 10: The turmoil in Tamil Nadu continues as Governor Vidyasagar Rao is yet to take a decision on the future of the government. After meeting both O Panneerselvam and Sasikala Nataraja, the governor has sent a report to the Centre. The governor has also sought legal opinion on how to deal with the ongoing political crisis in the state.
OPS is currently the caretaker chief minister of the state. While he has offered to withdraw his resignation, the law does not permit him to do so. Sasikala, on the other hand, has the numbers and has staked a claim to form the government in TN.
The
legal
opinion
given
to
the
government
in
this
matter
will
be
based
on
the
guidelines
laid
down
by
the
Supreme
Court
in
the
SR
Bommai
judgement.
The
broad
message
in
the
Bommai
verdict
is
that
the
majority
enjoyed
by
the
council
of
ministers
should
be
tested
on
the
floor
of
the
House.
In this case, the governor will have to take a call on whether to invite Sasikala to form the government or permit OPS to prove his majority on the floor of the house. Parliamentary convention demands that the governor has to appoint the leader of the ruling party as the CM. However, if there is no clear picture, he may allow another person of his discretion to act as the CM. In both the cases, the nominated person has to prove their majority within one month.
The
Bommai
verdict
Article
356
of
the
Indian
Constitution
deals
with
the
provisions
in
case
of
failure
of
constitutional
machinery
in
the
state.
Broadly,
it
deals
with
the
imposition
of
President's
rule
in
the
state.
However,
there
has
been
misuse
of
this
article
in
the
past
and
hence
the
SC
while
interpreting
the
same
laid
down
guidelines.
Here
are
the
guidelines...
--The majority enjoyed by the council of ministers shall be tested on the floor of the House.
--Centre should give a warning to the state and a time period of one week to reply.
--The
court
cannot
question
the
advice
tendered
by
CMs
to
the
President,
but
it
can
question
the
material
behind
the
satisfaction
of
the
President.
Hence,
Judicial
Review
will
involve
three
questions
only:
--Is
there
any
material
behind
the
proclamation?
--Is the material relevant?
--Was there any malafide use of power?
If there is improper use of Article 356 then the court will provide remedy.
--Under Article 356(3), powers of the President has been limited. Hence, the President shall not take any irreversible action until the proclamation is approved by the Parliament and can't dissolve the assembly.
--Article 356 is justified only when there is a breakdown of constitutional machinery and not administrative machinery.
--Article 356 shall be used sparingly by the Centre, otherwise it is likely to destroy the constitutional structure between the Centre and the states. Even Dr BR Ambedkar envisaged it to remain a 'dead letter' in the constitution.
OneIndia News