End of chapter: On Governors and reshuffle

An inglorious chapter of unedifying lessons in constitutional statecraft may be ending in Tamil Nadu with the transfer of Governor R.N. Ravi to West Bengal following the sudden and inexplicable resignation of incumbent C.V. Ananda Bose. The gubernatorial change of guard in these poll-bound States comes alongside that of five other States and two Union Territories. Rajendra Vishwanath Arlekar, Governor of Kerala, another State facing elections, will hold additional charge in Tamil Nadu. While Mr. Bose and Mr. Ravi had repeatedly administered political pinpricks to elected governments, Mr. Bose’s relations with West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee had recently improved. Mr. Ravi made no such allowances to the M.K. Stalin dispensation. As recently as January, he walked out of the Assembly, for the fourth year. Each time, he found a reason or manufactured an excuse for not fulfilling his mandate of delivering the Special Address to the House, under Article 176. Relations between Lok Bhavan and Fort St. George have remained strained since 2022, when Mr. Ravi returned a Bill — instead of reserving it for the President — seeking exemption from the central mandate of NEET-based medical admissions. The House historically readopted and re-sent the Bill to Lok Bhavan. Thereafter, Mr. Ravi created legislative paralysis by indefinitely delaying his decision on Bills, abusing powers under Article 200. He even argued that if a Governor withholds assent, the Bill is “dead”, a position rejected by the Supreme Court in the Punjab case (2023). He chose to continue in office, even after the Court, in 2025, nullified his inaction on 10 Bills and granted them “deemed assent”. Perhaps, he had become immune to controversies. The Home Ministry once forced him to backtrack after he unilaterally dismissed an arrested Minister. On another occasion, the Court rapped him for refusing to administer oath to a Minister whose conviction had been suspended by the judiciary.

Beyond such constitutional misadventures, Mr. Ravi also never fought shy of endorsing right-leaning ideologies, often appearing to position himself as a political opponent of the ruling DMK. He not only dubbed Mr. Stalin’s ‘Dravidian model’ slogan an “expired ideology” but also characterised it as a “sectarian” thought. His posture helped the DMK further its political campaign, accusing the Narendra Modi government of using Mr. Ravi to undermine the popular will expressed through the House. It is difficult to tell whether his transfer is meant to deprive Mr. Stalin of this political weapon or to end Ms. Banerjee’s comfort with Mr. Bose in an election season. But one thing appears clear: history may not treat Mr. Ravi’s tenure in Tamil Nadu as worthy of emulation in the conduct of Centre-State relations.