Kamla Beniwal’s ouster goes beyond politics
The fact that the Congress is agitated over the Union Government's decision to sack Mizoram Governor Kamla Beniwal, gives its political game away and mitigates the accusation that the Narendra Modi regime had acted out of vendetta. Ms Beniwal had been no ordinary appointee. As Governor of Gujarat, she had, much to the delight of the Congress (some would say at its behest), made life difficult for the State's then Chief Minister and now Prime Minister Modi. She routinely clashed with the regime on a variety of issues. Ms Beniwal had acted less as a President's appointee and more as a Congress agent. Yet, she was not dismissed after Mr Modi became the Prime Minister. She was, as were some other Governors, transferred to another State. The Congress did not raise a hue and cry when the other transfers happened, nor did it say anything when one particular Governor was eased out. That the party should have taken up Ms Beniwal's case with gusto, even in the face of compelling evidence about some of her acts of impropriety, to say the least, demonstrates that it still considers her to be of some value to needle the Prime Minister. Unfortunately for the Congress, the case against Ms Beniwal appears strong. This should be evident by the fact that the President signed the order to dismiss her after a careful scrutiny of the charges that stood against her and opinion from the Attorney General of India. The Congress has been demanding that the Government should officially reveal the reasons for its recommendation to the President on the matter. But the Government is not bound to do so. Indeed, even the President need not explain his decision. The Supreme Court ruling of May 2010, which the Congress has been touting to buttress its stand that Governors cannot be changed merely because a new Government assumes power, stated that the President need not “assign reasons”. While the court also said that the power under Article 156(1) of the Constitution “cannot be exercised in an arbitrary, capricious or unreasonable manner”, it made clear that the President can dismiss a Governor if there are “valid and compelling reasons”. The NDA Government sought Ms Beniwal's sacking on valid and compelling reasons. It pointed to the President that her actions (or inactions) as Gujarat Governor had cost the State exchequer a loss of more than Rs1,200 crore, and that she figured in a case of “unethical involvement” in the functioning of a cooperative society in Jaipur. These are serious charges in themselves; they are more so if the high constitutional post of a Governor is involved. The President must have been convinced about the gravity of the accusations, which is why he signed the dismissal order.
If Ms Beniwal or her sympathisers in the Congress or outside are aggrieved over the sacking, they have the right to approach the courts for redressal. They can try to prove what they allege as mala fide intent of the Modi Government. It makes no sense for them to keep parroting that she was ousted because of her earlier confrontations with Mr Modi. This may for them be akin to ‘putting two and two together', but a Government's recommendation and a President's order should be challenged on legal merit, not political perception alone.