The Tamil Nadu Political Crisis: Options Before The Governor And Precedents

With the Supreme Court indicating that it would deliver its verdict in the disproportionate assets case against V.K.Sasikala next week, the Tamil Nadu’s Acting Governor, CH.Vidyasagar Rao, appears to be inclined to wait and watch, as the rival factions battle it out for the numbers game in the assembly.LiveLaw imagines the hypothetical scenarios and the options before the Acting Governor as follows:SCENARIO 1: Supreme Court delivers its verdict on Tuesday, February 14, and the verdict goes against Sasikala. The AIADMK faction, led by her, elects a new leader, and submits a fresh letter to the Acting Governor, replacing her as the leader of the Legislature Party. The rival faction does not stake its claim.Option 1: The Acting Governor has to appoint the new leader as the Chief Minister, if Sasikala’s faction claims majority support in the assembly, and it is not disputed by the rival faction. The Acting Governor need not even ask the new leader to prove his strength in the assembly.SCENARIO 2: The rival faction, led by OPS, disputes Sasikala faction’s claims to majority support, insists that OPS did not resign voluntarily, and therefore, wants first opportunity to prove strength in the assembly. This is irrespective of whether the SC judgment is in favour of Sasikala or against her.OPTION 2: The Acting Governor must give the first opportunity to OPS, as he is the incumbent Chief Minister, and ask him to prove his majority support within a time limit to be fixed. Before that, he has to let OPS withdraw his resignation, which he claims, was obtained under duress.Precedent: In 1979, the then Prime Minister, Morarji Desai, who had resigned, due to factional strife within the ruling Janata Party, came up with a claim to form the Government, when his rival, Charan Singh, staked his claim. The President, Sanjiva Reddy asked both Desai and Charan Singh to submit a list of their respective supporters, on an assessment of which the President concluded that Charan Singh stood a better chance to form a stable government than Desai. Reddy, accordingly, asked Charan Singh to form the government, and seek a vote of confidence in the Lok Sabha. However, Charan Singh resigned before seeking the vote of confidence, as Congress withdrew its outside support to him.How This Precedent Is Relevant : This precedent is relevant only insofar as the question whether the President is bound to consider the claim of the outgoing Prime Minister, who has resigned, to form the Government again. OPS is precisely following Desai here.However, subsequent Supreme Court’s verdict in the S.R.Bommai case (1994) has shown that Reddy was wrong in assessing the claims himself, and denying Desai the first opportunity to prove his majority. The Supreme Court has made it clear in Bommai that the Governor cannot dismiss a Chief Minister, without giving him an opportunity to prove his strength in the assembly, if he is willing to. The question of inviting the rival leader in the ruling party comes after OPS fails to prove his strength in the assembly. It is not for the Governor to assess the rival claims, and come to a conclusion as to who, in the ruling party, has the requisite majority. It is the floor test, which will prove it, Supreme Court has held in Bommai.If the Acting Governor ignores the claim of OPS, and invites Sasikala, then he will be ignoring this vital precedent, as OPS happens to be an incumbent chief minister, claiming to have majority support, despite his resignation, apparently under duress.SCENARIO 3: OPS stakes his claim, with or without a list of supporters, and gets the first opportunity to prove his strength in the assembly. Option 3: If the Acting Governor decides to give the first opportunity to OPS to prove his strength, it is obvious, that whatever list which OPS gives to the Governor, will be disputed by the other side. It is not for the Governor to verify the support claimed by either side, but simply go by convention, and ask the incumbent chief minister to prove his strength first. OPS may be a caretaker chief minister after resignation, but under the Constitution he is the Chief Minister with all the powers. And he has not been defeated in the assembly so far. Nothing prevents him from staking his claim, even after his so-called resignation, which has been accepted, following the Desai precedent.If OPS loses his vote of confidence, the Acting Governor invites the leader of the rival faction, if he claims majority support in the assembly.Here, however, the role of the Speaker assumes importance. If the Speaker belongs to the anti-OPS faction, the OPS faction can well give a notice of no-confidence in the Speaker. If that notice is pending, then according to the Supreme Court’s judgment in Arunachal Pradesh case last year, the House cannot take the confidence motion moved by the Chief Minister, unless the no-confidence motion moved against the Speaker is disposed of.Secondly, questions about the...

The Tamil Nadu Political Crisis: Options Before The Governor And Precedents

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

Tags