Governor of Tamil Nadu
On 9 September 2021,Ravi was appointed as the governor of Tamil Nadu, [14] [15] and he took charge on 18 September 2021. [16] While he was welcomed by Tamil Nadu chief minister and Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) chief M. K. Stalin, [16] his appointment was questioned by allies of the DMK such as the Congress and Viduthalai Chiruthaigal Katchi,who claimed an ulterior motive in his appointment. [17] [18]
During his tenure,Ravi had multiple face-offs with the Tamil Nadu government. [19] In May 2022,he had kept 21 bills passed in the Tamil Nadu assembly on hold. [20] [21] He was criticised by politicians in Tamil Nadu for his delay in approving the bills and interference in the functioning of the government. [22] On 4 February 2022,he returned the bill seeking exemption from NEET to the speaker of the Tamil Nadu assembly,142 days after it was passed in the assembly. [23] The assembly subsequently re-adopted the bill,and forwarded it to the governor,who then reserved it for the consideration of the president. [24] [25] [26] [27] The president later declined assent to the bill. [28] [29] In April 2022,the Supreme Court questioned Ravi's action to refer the Rajiv Gandhi assassination convict A. G. Perarivalan's remission plea to the president as threatening the federal structure of government. [30] [31]
In January 2023,Ravi suggested that Tamilakam would be a more suitable name for the state of Tamil Nadu and criticised that the ruling political parties in the state have been regressive in the past fifty years. [32] [33] His remarks were condemned by leaders of various political parties including the ruling DMK,the opposition All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam,and other regional parties, [34] [35] while being welcomed by the Bharatiya Janata Party. [36] Protests were organised by some college students against his remarks. [37]
After the governor's speech in the assembly on 9 January 2023,the state government claimed that Ravi omitted select words such as women empowerment,secularism,self-respect,and portions on B. R. Ambedkar and Dravidian leaders from the speech submitted by the state government to the governor's office. [38] [39] As per convention,the governor was to read the speech prepared by the state government. Chief minister Stalin moved a resolution requesting that the speaker to relax the state assembly rules to record only the speech prepared by the state administration and strike out any passages that the governor inserted or omitted. The motion was passed by the assembly,and the original speech prepared by the state government was documented. [40] [41]
Ravi walked off from the assembly in the middle of the chief minister's speech on the resolution,before the assembly proceedings were closed. [42] [43] On 12 February 2024,Ravi again declined to read the entire customary address provided by the state government,except for the introductory parts,and walked off from the assembly as the speaker recited the Tamil rendition of the prepared address. [44] Later in the day,a press release from the governor state that he cannot abide by the speech provided by the state government since he did not agree with many of its excerpts on "moral and factual reasons",and stated it would be "constitutional travesty" if he accepted and orated the speech. [45] [46]
In June 2023,Ravi issued a communique that dismissed V. Senthil Balaji from the state's council of ministers,after Balaji's arrest by the Enforcement Directorate in a money laundering case. [47] he announcement was criticised by several political parties,and chief minister Stalin responded that the governor does not have the authority to dismiss a minister without the recommendation of the elected government and indicated that the decision would be challenged legally. [48] However,the governor withdrew the order on the same day,and stated that he was advised by the union home ministry to seek the opinion of the attorney general and acted accordingly. [49] In April 2025,Balaji resigned from the cabinet after an ultimatum by the Supreme Court of India. [50]
Ravi has been criticised as being dictatorial by Stalin. [51] Due to his reluctance and delay in giving assent to various bills passed by the state assembly,the assembly passed a resolution urging the union government to set time limits for governors to give assent to bills. [52] On 7 April 2025,Ravi stated that if the governor does not approve a bill,it indicates that the "bill is dead". [53] [54] The statement drew criticism from Stalin and P. Chidambaram. [55] [56]
In April 2025,in the case of The State of Tamil Nadu v. The Governor of Tamil Nadu, the Supreme Court delivered a landmark judgement mandating time limits for governors to act on bills passed by state legislatures. The court ruled that the prolonged inaction on the ten bills by governor Ravi before referring them to the president,after their re-passage by the legislature,was unconstitutional. [57] [58] [59] The court also cleared the pending bills under the provisions of Article 142. [60] However,on 20 November 2025,a five-judge constitutional bench of the Supreme Court issued an advisory on the April 2025 case. The advisory was based on the 14 constitutional questions raised by the president to the court. [61] The bench confirmed that no timeline is stipulated in the Constitution of India for the president or governors to take action on the bills. It further opined that the governors cannot sit on the bills indefinitely,and the governor has three options:to grant assent,to reserve it for the consideration of the president,or to withhold assent and return the bill to the assembly for reconsideration. [62]
On 12 April 2025,Ravi reportedly asked students to chant Jai Shri Ram during an event held at Thiagarajar College of Engineering in Madurai. [63] [64] The State Platform for Common School System,an association of educationists and activists, [65] wrote to the president Droupadi Murmu demanding Ravi's removal from office based on the allegation that his actions violated Article 159 of the Indian Constitution,which pertains to the oath of office taken by governors. [66] [67] Leaders from the ruling DMK and its allies also condemned the incident,stating that it was inappropriate for a constitutional authority to make religious exhortations at an educational institution. [68] [69] [70]
