In a fresh standoff between Kerala Governor Arif Mohammad Khan and Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan, tensions have reignited discussions about the Governor’s powers and tenure.
The friction escalated following the Governor’s controversial decision to summon top state officials and a sharp comment from CPI(M) state secretary MV Govindan, referring to the Governor as a “caretaker.”
This conflict raises two key constitutional questions: Is the Governor merely a caretaker after completing his five-year term? And does the Governor have the authority to summon state officials on contentious issues?
Governor or Caretaker?
Article 153 of the Indian Constitution mandates the presence of a Governor in every state.
Unlike the President of India, elected by members of Parliament and state legislatures, the Governor is appointed by the President, essentially through the Union government’s recommendations.
While the President enjoys a democratically elected mandate, the Governor is a centrally appointed figure, the ceremonial head of the state.
The Governor’s tenure as outlined in Article 156(1) is bound by the pleasure of the President, implying that a Governor can be removed at any point.
However, Article 156(3) sets a five-year term as a benchmark, while noting that a Governor may continue in office until a successor assumes charge.
The phrase “caretaker Governor” finds no mention in the Constitution.
Yet, CPI(M) leader Govindan’s comment on Arif Mohammad Khan’s extended tenure has sparked debate, with some legal experts seeing merit in the metaphor.
An ornamental phrase?
According to Kaleeswaram Raj, a Supreme Court lawyer, the term “caretaker Governor” is not entirely without basis.
“As per Article 156(1) of the Constitution, the Governor shall hold the office during the pleasure of the President, but according to Article 156(3), a term of five years is prescribed. Therefore, the phrase “caretaker Governor” makes sense,” he told South First.
However, former Director General of Prosecutions T Asaf Ali dismisses the idea.
“The concept of a ‘caretaker Governor’ does not exist in the Constitution,” Ali told South First.
“If a Governor remains in office beyond five years, it only means they continue to enjoy the President’s pleasure. The tenure is a minimum benchmark, not a hard limit. Even a single day in office depends on presidential discretion, as seen in Sheila Dikshit’s removal as Governor within six months,” he added.
Can the Governor summon officials?
The second flashpoint in the ongoing dispute revolves around the Governor’s move to summon Kerala’s Chief Secretary and state police chief.
This was in response to Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan’s alleged statement that proceeds from gold smuggling were being funnelled into anti-state and anti-national activities.
The Governor’s action has raised eyebrows, with many questioning whether it oversteps his constitutional role.
While the state government dismissed the move of the Governor by questioning his power to do so, there are also some sections within the government that are of the observation that the Governor holds significant discretionary powers under certain circumstances.
Meanwhile, an LDF representative asserted that the Governor lacks the authority to summon the Chief Secretary or the State Police Chief, emphasising that such actions undermine the democratic framework.
“Summoning top officials over a statement treads a fine line. Our Governor is like the former Viceroy of India Lord Curzon who is said to have a sense of his importance and is desperate to flaunt it wherever possible,” he told South First.
Advocate Kaleeswaram Raj has asserted that the Governor lacks the authority to summon the Chief Secretary or the State Police Chief, emphasising that such actions undermine the democratic framework.
Only an elected government has the mandate to administer the state,” Raj explained.
“Under Article 167 of the Constitution, the chief minister is only required to communicate Cabinet decisions and provide information sought by the Governor. This cannot be interpreted as granting the Governor powers to run a parallel government,” he stated.
Raj criticised the Governor’s interference in daily governance, calling it a flawed and distorted interpretation of constitutional provisions.
“This approach is inherently anti-federal and undemocratic,” he added, warning that such actions threaten the delicate balance between the executive and the constitutional head.
Criticises Governor
However, pointing to Article 163 of the Indian Constitution Ali emphasised the unparalleled authority vested in Governors, calling it the bedrock of their real powers.
“While the chief minister and Council of Ministers aid and advise the Governor, the exception lies in the discretionary powers granted by the Constitution,” he explained.
“The Constitution remains silent on what exactly constitutes ‘discretion,’ leaving it to the Governor to interpret. If the Governor invokes discretion, even the courts cannot challenge it,” he remarked.
Ali also highlighted that the President of India enjoys no such latitude.
“The President must act as per the advice of the Union Government. If the Union Cabinet rejects a Presidential request to reconsider a decision, that marks the end of the President’s power. But with Governors, discretion is absolute. Article 163 is crystal clear, with no ambiguity,” he asserted.
Ali further delved into Article 356, which empowers the Governor to intervene if he believes there is a breakdown in governance.
“The Governor can seek any information and summon officials to provide it. He is duty-bound to monitor and report the state’s affairs. If the government has nothing to hide, it can easily put an end to this ongoing tussle,” he concluded, hinting that transparency could defuse mounting tensions.
As the debate rages on, Kerala watches closely on whether there is a boundary between the Governor’s constitutional role and his overreach or whether the standoff could have far-reaching
implications for Union government-state relations.
Dileep V Kumar is a reporter for South First, with a decade-long career spanning electronic, print, and online media.
This article was originally published on South First.
