‘Developments in Kerala appeared to be a case of mental and not constitutional pleasure of the Governor, which is insufficient to remove a Minister’
‘Developments in Kerala appeared to be a case of mental and not constitutional pleasure of the Governor, which is insufficient to remove a Minister’
Constitutional experts feel that the Governor cannot arbitrarily exercise his pleasure regarding Ministers of a State government.
K.T. Thomas, former judge of the Supreme Court, noted that the pleasure exercised by a Governor shall not be his mental pleasure but the one perceived by the Constitution. The developments in Kerala appeared to be a case of mental and not constitutional pleasure of the Governor, which is insufficient to remove a Minister, he said.
The constitutional pleasure comes into play only when the Chief Minister gives advice to the Governor, and he shall abide by the advice of the Cabinet, said Mr. Thomas.
If the Chief Minister does not act on the displeasure, all that the Governor can do is ask him to reconsider the decision. In the event of the Chief Minister sticking to his earlier stand, it is the end of the road, he said.
The only occasion when a Governor can act without the advice of the Cabinet is inviting the Chief Minister to form the government. Once the Chief Minister is appointed, the Governor is under the constitutional responsibility to act according to his advice, Justice Thomas said.
Justice Chitambaresh, former judge of the Kerala High Court, felt that the pleasure of the Governor meant the sweet will of the Governor. However, the pleasure cannot be expressed whimsically or arbitrarily but only for valid reasons, he said.
The actions of the Governor can be called into question in a High Court. If the Chief Minister refuses to act or acts on the advice of the Governor, the final proceedings can be challenged in court.
The withdrawal of pleasure by the Governor has a persuasive force. If there are valid reasons for the withdrawal of pleasure, the Chief Minister has to necessarily follow them. If it is a whimsical or arbitrary decision, which lacks reason, the Chief Minister need not act on it, he said.
Any political party or public-spirited person or parties to this issue can take it up with the High Court. The test of reasonableness on the act of the Governor shall be carried out through a judicial review, said Mr. Chitambaresh.
