Don’t remove Governors without reason

The appointment of governors has traditionally been a partisan act, although a governor is meant to perform an important constitutional role in our federal system. Typically, a government at the Centre picks a person — usually a senior ruling party politician who cannot be fitted into the executive, or a retired official — deemed loyal to it.

Thus, when put to the test, governors have generally tended to function as keepers of the interests of those who appointed them, and only in rare cases have fulfilled their constitutional obligation in a non-partisan spirit, namely to see that a state government is run in accordance with the Constitution, and to act as a guide to the state government, irrespective of what colour it is.

It is evident that the Narendra Modi government wishes to replace governors of several states coming down from the time of the UPA because it would like its own “agents” lodged in those states, not least because some of them have Congress governments on which the Centre may like to keep a special eye. There is also the blatant need to accommodate senior BJP politicians who could not be made ministers.

In seeking to evict the so-called eminent persons from Raj Bhavans, the BJP is doing no more than what other ruling dispensations have done in the past. But now there is a fly in the ointment. Several governors are not taking the hint and appear in no hurry to oblige the Centre by putting in their papers. Their unstated argument is that they hold a constitutional post and are not employees of the Union government and can’t be pushed around.

Something like this just did not happen in the past. The reason why governors are suddenly behaving differently is because of the SC judgement of May 2010 in which a Constitution Bench led by the Chief Justice of India ruled that there must be “compelling” and “cogent” reasons to ask a Governor to go, and that the dismissal of a Governor by the Centre can be subject to judicial review. Unsound mind or body, or corruption can constitute “compelling” reasons.

The malaise of getting rid of governors appointed by a predecessor regime began in 1977 when the first non-Congress government led by Morarji Desai assumed office. It got its governors to dismiss nine Congress state governments. The shameful cycle of treating governors as hand-maidens has continued. The Modi government could avoid gubernatorial tinkering. But it should also initiate important reform in the way governors are appointed. May be, there should be confirmation hearings in Parliament for them, or their selection should be left to a constitutional commission, subject to the President’s approval.