A very interesting question has been raised by a controversy that has taken a very serious turn in Karnataka about the powers of the Governor of a state..The question which is now being discussed is under what circumstances a State Governor can remove a member of the Assembly or of the cabinet by invoking powers under Article 191 and 192 of the Constitution of India.
The entire controversy has arisen on the complaint filed by Congress MLC Sri K.C.Kondiah and other Congress leaders to the Karnataka State Governor in the month of November last year alleging that M.Janardhana Reddy and his brother Sri Karunakara Reddy and their friend Sri Sriramulu had encroached on forest land and altered the Karnataka-Andhra Pradesh border for illegal mining. The complaint also stated that the Reddy brothers had amassed disproportionate assets by illegal means. They alleged that they have misused their status as Ministers in the Cabinet of Sri B.S.Yediurappa The MLC urged the governor to remove the Reddy brothers from the Yeddyurappa government charging them with holding offices of profit as they had business interests in the state government. They therefore requested the Governor to disqualify the said Reddy Brothers and their colleague Sri Sriramulu from the membership of the legislature and the cabinet Mr Kondiah had even asked the governor to recommend to the Election Commission the disqualification of the brothers, as also of Mr Sriramulu
Taking note of the above Complaint submitted by Sri K. C. Kondiah, the Governor issued notice to Sri Janardhana Reddy and his two colleagues as to why their names should not be recommenbded to the Election Commission for their disqualification from the membership of the State Assembly on the ground that they are holding the office of profit under the State Government.
The controversy has arisen because whether having mining leases or alleged encroachments made in their mining operations or whether misuse of their status as Ministers in their business interest amounts to “holding of public Officeâ€. Reddy brothers submitted their objections contending that they do not hold any such office of profit under the State Government and that the Governor could not have invoked Article 191 of the Constitution of India against them and that the Governor has no such powers also.
On receipt of the said explanation, the Governor called upon the Reddy trios to appear before him for certain clarifications. Instead of appearing before the Governor, they sent some young Advocates and filed vakalats. In fact, they did so as they question the authority of the Governor to hold “court†in respect of any complaints. They stated in Public Platforms that the Governor is not a court under any definition of that term and that he has no such jurisdiction, they by implication alleged that he was influenced by his past association with Congress Party. The Governor has retorted by saying that no one should teach him law as he himself was a constitutional lawyer and a law minister before he became a Governor. However he has now decided to give Reddy brothers one more opportunity to appear before him. This has taken a political turn and both Congress and BJP have taken diametrically opposed stand and a discussion is about to start now.
The point which arises for consideration is the powers of the Governor. To know that, one should know under what circumstances a member of the Legislature can be disqualified. It is seen in Article 191 of the Constitution of India.
Under Article 191(1) disqualification of membership is given It reads:
“191 (1) A person shall be disqualified for being chosen as and for being a member of the Legislative Assembly or Legislative Council of a State –
(a) if he holds any office of profit under the Government of India or the Government of any State specified in the First Schedule, other than an office declared by the Legislature of the State by law not to disqualify its holder
Explanation to this Article is given as follows:
( Explanation – For the purpose of this clause) a person shall not be deemed to hold an office of profit under the Government of India or the Government of any State specified in the First Schedule by reason only that he is a Minister either of the Union or of such State.”
Article 192 states who has to take a decision in the matter:
“192 . (1) If any question arises as to whether a member of a House of the Legislature of a State has become subject to any of the disqualifications mentioned in Clause (1) of Article 191, the question shall be referred fro the decision of the Governor and his decision shall be final.
(2) Before giving any decision on any such question, the Governor shall obtain the opinion of the Election Commission and shall act according to such opinion.â€
Above provisions says that any member holding any office of profit under the State Government shall be disqualified by a decision of the Governor and he shall take a decision on the opinion of the Election Commission. The question the Reddy brothers have raised whether the Governor has right to hear the complaint like a Court. The Governor says that he could have straightaway called for the opinion of the Election Commission and taken a decision in the matter. But he felt that an opportunity should be given to these trios to make their stand clear before sending the Complaint to the Election Commission.
Article 191 no where says that the Governor cannot satisfy himself about the propriety or correctness of the allegations made in the complaint. Nowhere it is said that like a post Office, the Governor should straightaway call for the opinion of the Election Commission. The Article says that his decision is final and before taking a final decision, he should call for the opinion of the Election Commission and act according to such opinion. But this does not circumscribe his inherent powers to know for himself whether the Complaint has any merits at all. For that reason, if he calls these trios for a personal appearance, it cannot be stated as violative of any of the constitutional provisions .Let us wait for the future interesting development as the Governor is himself a renowned lawyer and was a Law Minister. Therefore one can safely conclude that he would not have taken such a step without knowing his powers and jurisdiction. I do not think he will be made to eat a humble pie.Hope it will not become ultimately a State Governor Vs State Government matter.