"There's no question of the Supreme Court judgement on Governors getting nullified. No one has the power to cancel it. Even the legislature has no power to cancel it. When there is a judgment, it's a law of land. The Supreme Court's judgement has to be respected,” says the MP
Published Apr 12, 2025 | 6:15 PM ⚊ Updated Apr 12, 2025 | 6:15 PM
The BJP is trying to have a presidential form of government in this this country, says DMK's Rajya Sabha MP and Senior Advocate P Wilson.
Synopsis: The DMK has been fighting to protect the federal character and the Constitution just not for the sake of Tamil Nadu but for the entire nation. The BJP is trying to install a presidential form of government, and all its recent moves point at this direction.
The Supreme Court’s landmark judgement against Governors indefinitely sitting on Bills came as a relief for non-NDA-ruled states.
While passing the judgement on 8 April, Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice R Mahadevan also set a deadline for Governors in handling Bills passed by the respective state assemblies. In the order uploaded on the Supreme Court’s website late on Friday, 11 April, the Bench also set a three-month deadline for the President to decide on Bills reserved by Governors.
The verdict came in a petition the DMK-led Tamil Nadu government had filed against Governor RN Ravi, who delayed 10 Bills.
Senior Advocate and DMK MP P Wilson was at the forefront of the legal battle for upholding the country’s federal character and democracy. In a freewheeling conversation with South First, he speaks about how the DMK’s stand has been vindicated, and the way forward.
Q: You were in the Supreme Court when it delivered this verdict. How did you feel when the judgement came?
A: We stand vindicated. This judgement is a path-breaking one, a landmark judgment which has brought victory not only for my leader MK Stalin, or for the people of Tamil Nadu, but for all of India. So the Constitutional Court, rightly and correctly at the appropriate time, has risen up and said, look, the will of the people should prevail.
Democracy is for the people, by the people and for the people. People elect their representatives to the Legislative Assembly or Parliament. When an Assembly sends a Bill, the Governor should necessarily and mandatorily follow the constitutional provisions, and with the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers, grant assent.
Q: Could you briefly explain the judgement. especially the deadline the Supreme Court has set for Governors?
A: The Supreme Court has clearly interpreted Article 200 of the Constitution, and the options available to a Governor when a Bill is sent for his assent for the first time or for the second time. Article 200, which, according to the Supreme Court, has given three options to a Governor:
If the Governor withholds the Bill and returns it to the Legislative Assembly, and Assembly reenacts it and sends it back for the second time, all options are closed. The only option is to grant assent.
Therefore, this is a landmark judgement which clearly acts as a guardrail and a guide for Governors. This is a complete encyclopedia, as far as Article 200 is concerned.
Q: One of the 10 Bills involved in this case is about making the chief minister the Chancellor of a university. So, with the Supreme Court directing to consider the Bills cleared, will Chief Minister Stalin officially become the Chancellor?
A: To my knowledge, all 10 Bills are related to exclude the Governor from the selection process of Vice Chancellors. So the Governor will still continue as the Chancellor.
Only the powers of the Governor as the Chancellor in the selection of the Vice Chancellors have been taken away.
Q: Is there any plan to move the Supreme Court to remove the Governor as Chancellor?
A: The Assembly has to do it because the statute clearly says that the Chancellor should be the Governor. If the legislature wants to replace the Governor with the Chief Minister as the Chancellor, it is within the powers of the legislature to bring in necessary amendments.
Q: Will the judgement hold for NEET exemption? The Governor had referred the related Bill to the President, who rejected it?
The NEET stands on a different footing. It’s a subject in the concurrent list. So therefore, the state has legislated an exemption Bill and forwarded it to the Governor with the recommendation that it be forwarded to the President. But the Governor unnecessarily raised certain questions and sought clarifications, which is not within his power. The Constitution does not permit him to act like a judicial body, asking the legislature how it can legislate a law.
So, the Assembly sat again, and sent the Bill back to the Governor, and he forwarded it to the President. Now what happened in this case is that on eight occasions, the Union government asked the state clarifications one after another.
The state government clarified. And, on advice of the Union council ministers, the President withheld assent. So, the NEET issue is different from the other 10 Bills.
Q: Do you think the clarifications requested by the Union government were unnecessary?
A: You can’t say they were unnecessary. It is a clarification which it wanted to know.
Q: In Tamil Nadu, Governors have been controversial, even during Annadurai and Karunanidhi’s time. Is it possible to bring a constitutional amendment to completely remove the gubernatorial post? Has the DMK ever thought about taking this initiative?
A: The Constitution can be amended by Parliament. And there is no second thought about amending the provisions relating to the Governor. You require the ratification from the state legislature. Parliament has the power to amend, and even transfer the Governor’s powers to the Speaker of the Assembly.
After seeing the way Governors are behaving and conducting themselves, particularly in non-BJP ruled states, it is high time that, we considered whether the office of the Governor is required. This institution of the Governor not only puts a financial burden on the state, but also brings disrepute to the states. The states are spending a lot of time in the courts to fight against the Governor over unnecessary issues. Governors are the reason for so much money and time being spent on litigations.
Q: Will the DMK or INDIA bloc MPs take up the issue of Governors in Parliament?
A: The issue has been brought repeatedly in Parliament. An MP from Kerala raised the issue in the previous sitting of the Rajya Sabha.
The issue of Governors misusing their position has been brought to the attention of the Union government. Governors act as an agent of the Union government. So certainly the MPs are also aware that the post of the Governor is only a liability. And, it is really not bringing any good to the state.
Q: Unlike other Governors in Tamil Nadu, DMK claims that RN Ravi has been intervening in the day-to-day functions of the government. If so, why not ask for his recall?
A: The DMK has already sought his recall. I remember TR Balu speaking about it. The Union government has been protective of RN Ravi from the very beginning. States like West Bengal, Karnataka, Kerala, Telangana, and Punjab, too, are facing the same issue with Governors.
Q: Tamil Nadu has secured a landmark verdict. Can the Union government or the President overrule the Supreme Court judgement?
A: No, there is separation of powers. There’s no question of the judgement getting nullified. No one has got the power to cancel it. Even the legislature has no power to cancel it. I don’t think anything can be done. When there is a judgment, it’s a law of land. The Supreme Court’s judgement has to be respected.
Q: Recently, the DMK challenged the Waqf (Amendment) Bill in the Supreme Court. It looks like the DMK is taking up issues against the BJP at a national level. Can we say that MK Stalin is gradually becoming a national leader?
A: In my view, our beloved leader MK Stalin has all the qualities and the qualifications to become the prime minister of this country. Every issue which he takes up, it’s of national importance, including the delimitation issue. Our leader has been a crusader, a warrior, a frontrunner for all rights of a state that is available under the Constitution. So in my personal opinion, I feel that he has got all the qualities to be as the prime minister.
Q: The Union government has said the DMK is raising the delimitation issue to cover up its failures. Chief Minister Stalin has formed a joint action committee. What is the committee doing now? And what is your action plan to counter the planned delimitation? Could you briefly explain the threat to the southern states?
A: States that implemented the family planning programme since 1976 have less population. State those did not implement the programme have more population. When Indira Gandhi was the prime minister, she did not want states like Tamil Nadu, Kerala, Karnataka, Punjab, with lesser population, to have fewer constituencies. So, in 1976, they introduced the 42nd Constitutional amendment, which froze the delimitation on the basis of 1971 census. After nearly 30 years in 2001, during the Vajpayee government, when Arun Jaitley was the minister, the situation was reviewed and they found that the population stabilisation hadn’t been achieved. They, too, did not want to let down the states, which followed the family planning scheme.
They introduced another constitutional amendment, freezing the delimitation for another 25 years, which expires in 2026.Thus, concerning the freezing of delimitation based on the 2001 census, it can be considered for adjusting the constituencies.
However, the 1971 census was the basis. So what can you infer from their conduct? Their conduct is clear that there is no population stabilisation, and the states that adhered to population control should not be penalised. Hence, the delimitation issue was taken up.
Amit Shah coming here and saying that it will not affect the states does not remove the impending danger. If you look at the Constitution, particularly Articles 81 and 82, the effective date for delimitation clearly begins in 2026.
So, it says that when the census is taken after 2026, then delimitation shall be mandatorily done on the basis of the census, that will take place after 2026. Visualise a situation in which the census has not been carried out since 2021 because of the Covid-19 outbreak. Now we will have the delimitation mandatorily from 2026.
Can you prevent it? You can’t say orally somewhere in the streets or somewhere in the meeting. You have to go to Parliament and make a statement and it has to be recorded. You also have the operation of the Constitution and it has to be stopped. So unless you make a constitutional amendment, you cannot simply say something and walk away.
What happened to Jammu and Kashmir? One fine day, the state of Jammu and Kashmir, a larger state, was trifurcated by the introduction of one Bill abrogating Article 370. They divided Jammu and Kashmir into three — two Union territories and one state. The state itself was not brought into effect until the Supreme Court said, “Look, you have to do it.”
They conducted an election only recently. So what happened to the Delhi NCR? It is now reduced to the level of a municipality. So you can’t sleep over your rights. And rightly, our Chief Minister has taken up this issue, called for a meeting, invited other Chief Ministers.
I want to tell you one thing. There is a population commission established by the Prime Minister, and the main agenda of the commission is to stabilise population.
Since once they fall back on population stabilisation, which is a criteria to arrest or to bring a balance between all states, they formed a commission which has the Prime Minister as its chairman. Nearly eight states are members of that commission, which also has Union ministers.
The states which will be affected, including Tamil Nadu, are also members of that committee. States which are going to benefit also there in the panel. What happened to that commission? It has become dysfunctional.
You are not making the commission functional. The commission must function first, and only then can a report be filed, accepted, and further steps taken. You are not making a constitutional amendment. However, the impending danger remains: the census has to be conducted in 2026.
We have all the material and our Chief Minister has rightly taken up the issue.
Q: The Joint Action Committee also proposed a freeze on delimitation for the next 25 years. Will it help the country’s growth? What about their representation?
A: Now, what has happened from 1971 onwards? Is our country not growing? You brought the freeze from 1971 onwards. How many years have gone? Nothing will be affected by an another freeze.
Q: But states like UP and Bihar are underdeveloped…
A: They have the population, and they can have their representatives, but you can’t have the number of constituencies according to the population. There will be a mismatch. It will run against the assurances given by the Union government to other states like Tamil Nadu. Imagine if they have more number of MPs. Now what will happen to the bargaining power? The south will be totally neglected.
Imagine a state like Uttar Pradesh having more number of MPs. The money of taxpayers in Tamil Nadu will be dumped in the states like UP. We are not against the tax sharing, but our rights will be reduced to nothing.
You will not have any political bargaining power at all. Our political participation in the formation of the government will become meaningless.
Q: One more question on delimitation. Do you think it is a long-term plan of the BJP to hush the voice of the south?
A: I think so, and that is why our Chief Minister is cautioning all the southern states. Let us be aware. Let us wake up to the situation. Let us not sleep over our rights. The BJP is trying to have a presidential form of government in this this country. You see the type of laws they are bringing? All marching towards a presidential form of government.
They say One Nation, One Election, Uniform Civil Code, etc. See the intrusion into the minority rights. A classical example is the new amendment to the Waqf Act, ultimately reducing it to nothing. Now, to donate Waqf property, you need to prove that you are a Muslim.
Does property have a religion? If a Hindu wants to donate it to a Waqf, you can’t do it. A Christian wants to donate property to a Waqf, they can’t do it. So therefore, where are we heading? This is the time for all political parties across India to think about the rights of the people.
Ultimately, we can’t mortgage the rights of states like Tamil Nadu, which is always fighting for its own right. Not only for its own but also for the rights of other citizens in the country.
Q: You talk about UCC and One Nation, One Election and the undermining of the federal structure, etc. What will be DMK’s action plan to fight them? Will DMK form committees for all these issues?
A: I think this question has to be answered by my honorable leader. I can’t take any decision on it, but the way these issues have been taken up and fought, you can be assured that for every issue, the party’s stand is very clear. The rights of the people have to be protected.
The state’s autonomy has to be protected. Co-operative federalism has to be protected. And whatever the rights that are given to us under the Constitution. The DMK strives hard to fight for it, protect and preserve it.
Q: If education being in the concurrent list is the only problem to abolish NEET, will the DMK move the Supreme Court shift it education to the state list?
A: I think one of our members of the Legislative Assembly, Dr Ezhilan, has filed a writ petition challenging its removal from the concurrent list.
I introduced a Private Member’s Bill in the Rajya Sabha to shift it from list three to list two. The reason is that when we establish universities and we have the infrastructure and the cost is borne by the state.
Why should the NEET be there when the state has the power to conduct board exams and admit students. As far as NEET is concerned, the state government has already filed a suit challenging Section 14 of the National Medical Commission in the Supreme Court. An all-party meeting, too, decided to approach the Supreme Court for abolishing NEET.
(Edited by Majnu Babu).
