Recently, Kerala witnessed a controversy surrounding the reappointment of Gopinath Ravindran as the Vice Chancellor of Kannur University. This appointment sparked controversy because it was contrary to the decision of the Governor, who also serves as the Chancellor of State Universities. The governance and functions of the Governor are defined in the statutes that manage the universities under a specific state government. However, their part in appointing the Vice Chancellors has often led to disputes with the political executive.
The Role of Governors in State Universities
In most instances, the Governor of a state is the ex-officio chancellor of the universities in that state. As the Governor, they function upon the advice and assistance of the Council of Ministers. Conversely, in their capacity as the Chancellor, they act independently of the Council of Ministers and make their own decisions on all university matters.
Cases of Central Universities
According to the Central Universities Act, 2009, and other statutes, the President of India becomes the Visitor of a central university. In this role, the Chancellors in central universities are titular heads with limited roles such as presiding over convocations. These individuals are appointed by the President in his capacity as Visitor. Simultaneously, Vice Chancellors are also appointed by the Visitor from panels of names selected by search and selection committees formed by the Union government.
Constitutional Provisions Related to the Governor’s Role
The Governor leads a dual role vis-s-vis the State Government as the constitutional head of the state. He is bounded by the advice of his council of ministers (CoM) and serves as a crucial link between the Union Government and the State Government. They’re appointed by the President and act as the nominee of the Central Government. The Governor also carries discretionary powers to invite the leader of the largest party/alliance, post-election, to form the government.
Controversies Surrounding the Governor’s Role
The Governor’s role has been subject to controversy, with allegations of abuse of power by the Centre. The process of appointment has often been the cause of contention. There have been several instances where politicians and former bureaucrats identifying with a particular political ideology have been appointed as Governors, arguably leading to bias. Moreover, the Governor’s position has occasionally been used to favour a particular political party, and their recommendation for President’s Rule in a state has sometimes been driven by political whims rather than objective materials.
Recommendations of Committees on the Governor’s Role
Various committees have proposed recommendations surrounding the role of the Governor. The Punchhi commission – 2010 suggested provisions for governor impeachment by the state legislature and the involvement of the state chief minister in the governor’s appointment. It also recommended amendments to Articles 355 & 356. Similar recommendations were made by the Sarkaria Commission (1988), Administrative Reforms Commission (1968), Rajamannar Committee (1971) and Justice V.Chelliah Commission (2002).
Legal Judgments on Governor’s Discretionary Powers
According to the S.R. Bommai Judgment (1994), the only forum that should test the majority of the government of the day is the Assembly floor and not Governor’s subjective opinion. Similarly, the Supreme Court in the Nabam Rebia judgment (2016) declared that the exercise of Governor’s discretion Article 163 should be limited and not arbitrary or fanciful.
