Tamil Nadu Governor R.N. Ravi is no stranger to controversies. In the past four years, since he took charge as the governor of the state in September 2021, he has all along been full of controversies. His official actions and comments have always invoked political rows in the state. And now in the latest instance, the Supreme Court invoked powers to declare the pending10 bills on which he had delayed action as approved.
The first sign of trouble between the Governor and the DMK government became obvious when he refused to clear the anti-NEET bill passed by the state assembly. The bill seeking exemption from NEET exams for admission to undergraduate medical courses was pending with the governor. And during an event held at the Raj Bhavan Ravi said that if a bill doesn’t get his assent, it means that the bill is dead. This was the first controversy stirred by Ravi.
Replying to Ravi, Chief minister M.K. Stalin said that Ravi was not acting as a facilitator for sending the bill to the President for assent. In January 2022, the DMK began making its demand for his ouster from the state and staged protests across the state. In fact one of the ideologies of the DMK is that there is no need for a governor when there is an elected government. Ravi sent back the bill to the state assembly on the ground that it was against the interests of students from rural areas and economically weaker sections. The state assembly re-adopted it in February 2022 and returned it to him. He stirred the second political row through his action again. This time he said that the NEET is here to stay. “I am telling you very frankly. I will never give clearance to NEET Bill. It is a subject on which only the President is competent to give the clearance. Given to me, I shall never give it. Be sure about it,” Ravi said.
Ravi then had referred the anti-NEET bill to the President, leaving the matter pending. So the state government sought remedy from the Supreme Court. In November 2023 the apex court described it as a “serious concern” and a “constitutional deadlock” created by the governor. On February 7, 2024, the top court asked whether the governor referred to the President 10 bills re-adopted by the State legislature only to avoid having to give consent to them.
The state legislature had passed 12 bills in the assembly mostly relating to appointment of vice-chancellors in the state-run universities. Governor Ravi did not give his assent to the bills. Ravi, as governor, is the chancellor of the state run universities and six of the universities in the state do not have vice chancellors. He had always stirred a controversy with the appointment of vice chancellors.
The third controversy came up when he unilaterally “dismissed with immediate effect” minister V. Senthil Balaji from the council of ministers hours after he was arrested by the Enforcement Directorate in a money laundering case. He immediately did a U-turn and took back his order to dismiss Balaji. Ravi wrote to Stalin that “I have been advised by the Honourable Union Minister of Home Affairs that it would be prudent to seek the opinion of the Attorney General also. Accordingly, I am approaching the Attorney General for his opinion. Meanwhile, the order of dismissal of minister Senthil Balaji may be kept in abeyance until further communication from me.” But Chief minister Stalin retained Balaji as a minister in the cabinet without any portfolio.
The fourth time was again when he refused to re-induct minister Ponmudi after he was acquitted by the court in a corruption case, even when it was the chief minister’s prerogative. The Supreme Court slammed Ravi for refusing to re-induct Ponmudy. “We are seriously concerned about the conduct of the governor in this case. We did not want to say it aloud in court. He is defying the Supreme Court of India,” the top court said then. And later Ponmudy was administered the oath of office by the governor.
The next row was when he walked out of the state assembly in a huff. He even omitted portions of the customary address, which contained words like Kalaignar, Dravidam. Ravi’s refusal to toe the line of the state government during the governor’s customary address to the assembly has become an annual feature.
The sixth time was when a petrol bomb was hurled at the main gate of the Raj Bhavan. It was a molotov cocktail hurled by a lone man. The police investigated the case and said that the man who hurled the bomb was a history-sheeter named Krupa Vinoth. But Ravi said that more than one person was involved in the attack and it was “a serious attack” and happened against the constitutional head of the state. The case was later transferred to the NIA which through its investigation concluded that Vinoth was the lone accused. The NIA through its investigation rejected Ravi’s claim that more people were involved in the attack.
But now the Supreme Court’s verdict against Ravi’s actions has come down as a huge relief for the DMK government.
