If there is no showdown time, it will show signs. The politically-induced constitutional crisis is brewing between certain states, especially those appointed by opposition to the BJP and the central government led by Narendra Modi, which were appointed as states of a.
In the case where laws as set out in the Constitution are concerned, this is a space today, and it is a battlefield between opposition to interpretation, fundamental values and core principles. The BJP gained reputation in an indelible way, as Congress did for its overuse and abuse of the infamous Section 356, under which the opposition-ruled state government was dismissed.
One party’s view of the silence of the Constitution has been used by the other party to take advantage of what is not written in the text. By doing so, federal relations, including the role and power of the governor, appearing in Article 200, have been transformed into a tethered ground in trivial ways. This relentless cut is different from the general past when the governor appointed by the Congress Center played a role in dismissing the opposition government.
The good thing is that every constitutional crisis, whether caused by small reasons or for lofty reasons, requires that the public, including social media consumers, as the primary source of information about the current situation, must consider the Constitution and what it says. Even if there is no real trouble to satisfy their curiosity about the book, it is the first time in the history of the Republic that so many people have realized their existence, the ability to spark political tensions and legal struggles.
This is the first time in 75 years in the Republic, the Constitution has become a key political campaign issue, and the dominant BJP and opposition have claimed to be defenders. By turning the Constitution into a battlefield, it suddenly gains a new life, from the way it is copied to the contents in it, including the exquisite illustrations and exquisite calligraphy in the original Hindi and English versions, to the contents contained therein and, more importantly, its meaning.
How obvious is the thing; the state of Tamil Nadu, meaning the DMK government of MK Stalin, is very annoyed to take the governor to court. Earlier, the Punjab government led by AAP’s Bhagwant Singh Mann, brought the governor to the court because the Supreme Court clashed with the power of the appointed governor, which, as the Supreme Court said, “is a rest for the elected representative of the people in the Democratic Party of Parliament”.
Since the governors of opposition-ruled states – governors of Tamil Nadu, Kerala, Karnataka, Punjab and West Bengal have resorted to the same strategy, using a holding that makes it difficult for the government to pass the delay of the regulations, thus making it difficult for the government to extend the rule by constituting the regulations, which makes it difficult for the government to extend the rule by constituting the regulations, which makes it difficult for the Petty model to be seen. These strategies are simple and annoying because the bill cannot become law without the governor’s consent. The consent of the booking is bad enough, but in recent times the governor has held the bill for a long time and then handed the responsibility to the president through the Union’s Home Office. Some sit on the bill to relegise the state legislature, which, under the Constitution, requires the governor to agree with fuss.
According to Speaker Biman Banerjee, West Bengal has 23 bills awaiting the governor’s consent. Worse, Governor CV Ananda Bose and the spokesperson who will elect the newly elected member to the General Assembly in 2024. Six bills are awaiting his consent; seven bills have been sent back to the state government for reconsideration and four bills have been transferred to the president due to its consent.
The fact that the opposition ruled state has brought the governor to the courts and to the Supreme Court, resorting to extraordinary measures by invoking the “full authority” of Article 142, under which it can pass the ordinance and make an order “is necessary because any litigation must be carried out in this case before any cause or any cause, and any litigation must be carried out in this case, and in this case, and in this case, so that it can be declared in this case as a whole. “Error” and “Illegal”.
If the Supreme Court’s explanation of the struggle between the Tamil Nadu government and its governor RN Ravi implies that the governor is deployed as troublesome, RN Ravi is responsible for “creating the “defying water inspired by the high constitutional battle that has been persistent at any time”, then the root cause is political.
Ironically, history is repeating: what Congress has done in the past, what the BJP is doing, but it is different. Congress ensured that the elected government was rejected by using the Governor’s report of the collapse of the constitution written by nearly every non-Congressional nation and imposed presidential rule under Section 356, while the BJP used a route with some patrols, unless in Manipur, but by making it difficult for the state government to operate.
The president’s rule has been estimated to be 130 times since 1950. Picking and stalling to prevent the state from functioning in critical ways, such as appointing a vice president of a state-funded university, is a different thing. The governor’s effect in these cases has been reduced to itching under the skin. Given that the number of notes on the president has been made by some governors in recent years, and the timeliness of legislation such as the WAQF Amendment 2025 Act has become the act of parliament, it can be concluded that different people have different precedents.
There is a long-term cost of political conflict between the Centre and certain countries. The center, whether the party or alliance has power, the center is always doubtful. Ashok Mitra, the first finance minister of CPI(M) in 1977, its transactions were always contaminated. But what is tempting is that the use of silence as a consent misunderstanding of the federal model defined by the constitution in the short term has an lingering influence that exceeds the usual span of political life. Just as the contamination suffered by Congress’ use of Section 356, the BJP may have earned the same reputation for using the governor as a political politics that undermines the stable political politics of opposition-run state governments.
Shikha Mukerjee is a senior journalist based in Kolkata
