Now questions are often being raised regarding the role of governors. A major reason for this is the inclination and political activism of the governors towards the central government.
It is strange that in this regard the Supreme Court had to advise that the Governors have to understand that they are not directly elected representatives of the people.
In fact, last week the state governments of Kerala, Punjab and Tamil Nadu had appealed to the Supreme Court that the Governor was hanging the bills passed by them. Even the financial bills are not being approved.
The Supreme Court made strict comment that ‘You are playing with fire’ while hearing the petition filed by the Punjab Government.
The Supreme Court said that the Governors will have to give up the tendency that they will give approval to the bills only after the matter comes to the court. In a way, this comment of the court is going to question the dignity of the post of Governor.
This is perhaps the first time that state governments had to approach the court to get approval on bills passed in the Assembly. Whereas the Governor cannot be considered unaware of the rule that his right to withhold approval on passed bills is limited.
Although earlier also the Governor was seen working as per the wish of the Center and with party inclination, but in the last eight-nine years, the way he has been seen working openly keeping the dignity of his post at stake, It is natural for questions to arise. The post of Governor is constitutional and, in a way, a matter of honour.
Its responsibility is to guard democratic and republican values with the consent and cooperation of the state government.
But since they are appointed by the Central Government, it is obvious that there is a thread of undisclosed political interest between the two.
Often, in states where there are governments from opposition parties at the Centre, tense relations are seen between the Governor and the Chief Minister.
Even before this, the Governor has ousted the state governments several times at the behest of the Centre.
But in the last few years, governors have been seen deliberately trying to obstruct the functioning of governments.
Delhi is a vivid example of this, where the Lieutenant Governor has, in a way, taken all the powers of the elected government into his own hands and keeps overturning every decision of the government.
Till some time ago, a war of words was also seen between the Governor and the Chief Minister in West Bengal.
The Governor used to openly give party statements. It was only after his departure that the state government could heave a sigh of relief. But the same attitude is visible in Punjab also. There is often a standoff between the Governor and the Mann government.
Even the Governor did not allow calling a special session of the Assembly, for which the government had to approach the court.
Such conflicts are visible in almost every state where opposition parties at the Center are in power. In this way the governors have lowered the dignity of their post.
Due to the political dispute between them and the state government, ultimately the people there have to suffer the consequences. Many development works come to a halt. If the Supreme Court has to reprimand the work which should be done within constitutional limits, then it is a matter of regret for democracy.