Follow in footsteps of Presidents : Vanam Jwala Narasimha Rao

 Follow in footsteps of Presidents

Vanam Jwala Narasimha Rao

Telangana Today (12-04-2022) 

Governor of Telangana met the Prime Minister and Union Home Minister and later addressed media that (her) Government is not bestowing the due respect to her. Governor also mentioned about protocol violations to her. Governor further said that since she was not satisfied with the recommendation of Government to nominate Koushik Reddy as MLC she kept the issue in pending. Media also reported quoting Governor that had she wanted, the government would have collapsed and everything will be decided by the people.

The Governor’s post and position which is an important institution in the Indian cooperative federalism has been subjected to some sort of criticism ever since it was created. Our country has the great reputation of dismissing the first ever elected communist Government in the world in 1959 in Kerala headed by EMS Namboodiripad while he was enjoying full majority by Burgula Ramakrishna Rao as Governor. Subsequently it happened many times both in Congress party and non-Congress party rule.

Executive Powers:

Chief Minister of a state is the democratically elected Chief Executive. The entire executive powers are under his control. Governor according to the Constitution is appointed to that post by the President of India on the recommendation of Prime Minister. A cursory look may appear that the powers and responsibilities of Governor in the state or more or less similar to that of President of India at the center. But in fact, not exactly so. The framers of the Constitution visualized that the Governor uses the powers and responsibilities entrusted to him or her through Constitution, to keep the country united with the spirit of cooperative federalism. However, though not all, at least few of them, over a period, in connivance with the Union Government abused these powers on various occasions and for various reasons. In any state the Government that is in power is the Government of the Governor and whatever the Governor requires in the state she or he may directly contact the Chief Minister and get it done. This is what happens at the center.

Comparing Powers:

Against this background it may be of interest to compare the powers of Governor at the state level and President at the central level. An academic discussion advocates that it is the President who is supreme and more powerful than the Prime Minister. Governors have no such enormous powers. If one fundamentally ponders over, before actually going into the niceties, the President is elected by all the elected peoples’ representatives of Lok Sabha and State Legislatures as well as the Rajya Sabha, where as the Prime Minister is just the leader of the majority party in the Lok Sabha! Thus, certainly, the President is more representative in character. Prime Minister however is the elected Chief Executive. In the case of Governor, it is a mere nominated institution where as the Chief Minister is democratically elected individual representing the people at large.

Most of the constitutional pundits often quote the experience of Britain the model of which India adopted. But the fact is that India did not in toto adopted British model and the quintessence is, it is partly parliamentary form and partly Presidential form. Despite this, the beauty of the Constitution is that so far during the last 75 years no President has ever misused or overstepped the powers, or spoke against the elected government at the center which in fact is his or his own Government, or expressed displeasure that he or she was ever insulted, or threatened that if he or she wants the Union Government would be dismissed! The main reason for this is that, the person who is elected as President is an acceptable individual to the Prime Minister and the ruling party. This is not the case with Governors. Irrespective of the fact that whether the Governor is acceptable to the Chief Minister or not President appoints him or her on the advice of Prime Minister. The individual so appointed as Governor would be one who belongs to the ruling party at center with exceptions.     

The real “functionary” according to the Constitution is President and not the Prime Minister. Article 74 of Constitution of India speaks about "Council of Ministers to aid and advise President". In the states the role of the Governor is similar. The Governor has no option except to accept the advice of Cabinet led by Chief Minister. The President of India is the head of state of the Republic of India. The President possesses enormous power. Despite this every president till date took decisions only based on the advice of Prime Minister. They seldom differed with the Prime Minister the way it happened in the case of Koushik Reddy or in the case of Protem Chairman of Council in Telangana state.

Constitution says:     

Constitution of India says that the Prime Minister shall be appointed by the President and the other Ministers shall be appointed by the President on the advice of the Prime Minister. In India an occasion for real exercise of this power arose for the first time when Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan was President who exercised his discretion and appointed GL Nanda as PM even before the Congress Party could indicate its choice following Jawaharlal Nehru’s death. Radhakrishnan again followed the same procedure and appointed GL Nanda when Lal Bahadur Shastri died. However, on both the occasions Nanda was mere caretaker PM. After Indira Gandhi assassination President Zail Singh, even before Rajiv Gandhi was elected as Congress Party Parliamentary leader, appointed him as PM. Consequent to 1989 general elections President Venkatraman, while inviting VP Singh after Congress refused to form government and then after VP Singh’s resignation in inviting first Rajiv Gandhi and then Chandrashekhar, exercised his discretionary powers. However, Neelam Sanjiva Reddy’s decision in 1979 in the case of appointing Charan Singh, though faced some criticism was cooled down soon as there was no option then.  

This is an ample proof that the Prime Minister and his council of ministers hold office at the pleasure of President. The President may also exercise his discretionary power, which is inherent in the Constitution, in dismissing a PM even if he or she enjoys majority in Lok Sabha, though there is no precedent and in future also highly unlikely. Had the Presidents of India also resorted to dismissals of Governments at the center by invoking discretionary powers, the way few Governors did in states, what would have happened to the democracy in India is anybody’s guess.  

When none of the Presidents in India during the past 75 years of democratic history including those elected during one party in power and continued later after a different party came to power like Neelam Sanjiva Reddy or like Pranab Mukherji, were controversial in discharging their duties and responsibilities and also worked closely, cordially and friendly with Prime Ministers, why not the appointed Governors who are not as powerful as President do the same? It’s a million Dollar question.

Probably it is only Constitutional experts who will be able to ponder over this. India is the one and only country among several countries that got independence from the British colonial rule where elections are regularly held and governments are changed in regular intervals and has come to stay as the largest democratic nation in the world. Let us hope that this continues forever without any hurdles.

It is better if Governors follow the footsteps of Presidents in maintaining cordial relations with the elected executive heads to uphold the democratic spirit of country.