TESTY TIES

The contentious relationship between the West Bengal and Kerala governors with their chief ministers is out in the open. Instead of airing their dirty lines in public, they should maintain constitutional propriety and decorum

- Lokendra Malik

OUR Constitution is a constructive one. There is no room for absolutism. There is no space for anarchy. Sometimes it is argued, though, in a different context, that one can be a 'rational anarchist, but the said term has no term in the constitutional governance and the rule of law. Fulfilment of constitutional idealism ostracizing anything that is not permissible by the language of the provisions of the Constitution and showing to its spirit and silence with a sense of reawakening to the vision of the great living document is, in fact, constitutional renaissance," observed Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra in his judgment in the famous Delhi government case in 2018.

Today, these words are relevant for West Bengal and Kerala, where the governors and chief ministers are at odds on various issues, including their constitutional relationship and the exercise of powers. Their differences have been in the public domain. Several constitutional pundits, political thinkers and commentators rightly opine that a governor and chief minister should maintain cordial relations to perform their constitutional duties and advance constitutional renaissance in the democratic order.

Last month, West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee had blocked Governor Jagdeep Dhankhar on Twitter. She was annoyed with him as he had become a habitual critic of her government and did not hesitate to air his differences in public and on social media platforms like Twitter.