The DMK, an ardent supporter of federalism, has always questioned the role of governors. DMK founder CN Annadurai compared the role of the governor to that of a goatee, saying both were unnecessary. The dismissal of the M. Karunanidhi government during the Emergency on the recommendations of Governor KK Shah further hardened the DMK’s stand. In 2018, as leader of the opposition and DMK president, MK Stalin demanded Governor Banwarilal Purohit to resign over his alleged attempts to undermine the state’s autonomy through “district visits”.
In this background, Chief Secretary V. Irai Anbu has recently written to the Heads of the Departments informing that Governor RN Ravi “wanted to know about the working of some departments” And the “ongoing welfare schemes of both the state and central government” have sparked a controversy. Mr. Stalin has yet to say anything about the letter. However, the DMK’s allies – the Congress and Viduthalai Chiruthigal Katchi – have questioned the governor’s authority to seek reports from state government departments. The Governor can be briefed only by the Chief Minister, just as the President is briefed by the Prime Minister, he argues. However, DMK spokespersons have taken a tough stand, arguing that Mr Ravi’s actions are different from those of his predecessor, who interacted directly with officials.
Read also | Letters to secretaries are routine: Tamil Nadu Chief Secretary
The chief secretary clarified that his communication requesting secretaries to prepare presentations for the governor was “routine” and described the debate on his letter as “unnecessary”. Nevertheless, the development points to the political situation created by a strong government at the Centre. The appointment of former Intelligence Bureau officer Sri Ravi as governor had raised suspicion among the DMK and its allies. He felt that he had been sent to Tamil Nadu to investigate the DMK government, which referred to the central government as the ‘Union’ government, arguing that the ‘Sangh’ “embodies federal principles”. Perhaps to dispel preconceived notions, Mr Ravi said soon after the swearing-in that he would work within the parameters set out in the Constitution and hoped to make his relationship with the DMK government “as beautiful as possible”.
The DMK government, however vocal on federalism, cannot afford to oppose the governor, that too soon. Tamil Nadu witnessed a bitter fight between Governor M. Channa Reddy and Chief Minister Jayalalithaa in the mid-1990s, the latter claiming that she acted “without complacency” when she met him at the Raj Bhavan in August 1993. Since 1996, relations between the Raj Bhavan and the Secretariat have been largely cordial. The DMK, which shared power at the Center from 1999 to 2013, used its influence and appointed Surjit Singh Barnala in 2004. Karunanidhi shared a special bond with Barnala as the latter refused to recommend the dismissal of the DMK government in January. 1991.
The rise of the BJP as the ruling party with a thumping majority at the Center has turned the clock back for the DMK. Governors in opposition-ruled states are unlikely to sign on the dotted lines. Although the AIADMK was an ally of the BJP, Mr. Purohit refused to support all its policy decisions. There was a case of AIADMK cabinet recommendation for the release of seven life convicts in the Rajiv Gandhi assassination case. Mr. Purohit kept the file pending for ages and finally washed it and sent it to the President. Now, the bill by the DMK government to admit students to undergraduate medical courses without NEET, which was sent to the Raj Bhavan to be sent to the President, remains unknown.
The DMK’s commitment to its core values and its ability to resist future interference from the governor, apart from its constitutionally bound talks, will be tested in the coming months.
kolappan.b@thehindu.co.in
vijay.kumar@thehindu.co.in
.