Slammed by Supreme Court, Tamil Nadu Governor RN Ravi sparks fresh storm with ‘Jai Shri Ram’ call at college event

Why is Tamil Nadu Governor RN Ravi under renewed scrutiny?

Tamil Nadu Governor RN Ravi has drawn intense political and civil society backlash following an incident at a public event where he reportedly encouraged students to chant the religious slogan “Jai Shri Ram.” The controversy erupted just days after the Supreme Court of India delivered a stinging verdict against his earlier decision to withhold assent to ten bills passed by the Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly. That decision, according to the top court, was both “illegal” and “arbitrary,” and violated constitutional norms of governance.

The combination of judicial reprimand and a perceived religious overtone in a state-led educational context has ignited criticism from opposition leaders, educational groups, and constitutional experts alike. Critics argue that the Governor, already facing accusations of overstepping constitutional limits, is now accused of breaching the secular fabric of public institutions by promoting a religious slogan often linked with partisan political ideologies.

What exactly happened at the college event in Madurai?

The incident unfolded during Governor RN Ravi’s appearance at an event hosted by Thiagarajar Engineering College in Madurai. While addressing the students, he is reported to have invoked “Jai Shri Ram” in the context of the Kamba Ramayanam, an ancient Tamil rendition of the Ramayana. While some attendees chanted the slogan in response, the moment quickly attracted controversy, with critics arguing that the Governor’s invocation of a religious slogan at a state-run academic institution was inappropriate and unconstitutional.

Though no official video statement from Raj Bhavan has been released to clarify the Governor’s intent, political observers note that the act—especially amid the Governor’s strained relationship with the ruling Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) government—appears to many as a politically loaded gesture.

How did political leaders and civil groups respond?

The reaction from political leaders was swift and sharply critical. Senior Congress leader Sasikanth Senthil suggested that the Governor’s actions were driven by frustration and a desire to provoke the state’s ruling coalition. He alleged that the use of “Jai Shri Ram” in such a context represented not merely a religious invocation but a political signal, particularly given the slogan’s frequent association with the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS).

The State Platform for Common School System – Tamil Nadu (SPCSS-TN), an influential educational advocacy group, went a step further. In a formal statement, the body accused the Governor of violating Article 159 of the Indian Constitution, which requires the Governor to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution and the law.” The organization demanded his immediate removal from office, citing a breach of his oath to uphold constitutional neutrality and secular values.

What did the Supreme Court say about the Governor’s handling of state bills?

The fresh controversy comes on the heels of a landmark Supreme Court verdict that strongly criticised Governor RN Ravi’s decision to withhold assent to ten significant bills passed by the Tamil Nadu state legislature. The apex court ruled that the Governor’s inaction was not conducted in “good faith,” and amounted to a violation of democratic principles enshrined in the Constitution.

The court concluded that the bills, many of which had been pending for over three years, should be considered “deemed assented” from the date they were reintroduced to the Governor for approval. The ruling was hailed as a pivotal reaffirmation of federal balance in India’s constitutional structure and a clear message to Governors across the country to adhere strictly to their constitutional roles rather than act as political agents.

What constitutional issues does this incident raise?

This episode revives longstanding concerns about the role of Governors in India’s federal democracy. Appointed by the President but often aligned with the Union government, Governors have occasionally clashed with state administrations—particularly those led by parties not aligned with the Centre. Legal scholars have flagged that the Governor’s encouragement of a religious slogan at a public institution, particularly in Tamil Nadu—a state with a long legacy of rationalist and secular politics—could be viewed as a challenge to the principle of state neutrality in religious matters.

Moreover, the Governor’s recent conduct invites deeper scrutiny under Article 200 and Article 159 of the Constitution. While Article 200 defines a Governor’s responsibilities regarding assent to bills, Article 159 outlines the Governor’s oath to uphold constitutional law. The Supreme Court ruling underlined the time-bound nature of a Governor’s discretion in legislative matters, and this latest controversy may compel further debate over whether similar checks should exist for conduct that could be seen as communal or politically polarising.

Why is Tamil Nadu particularly sensitive to issues of secularism?

Tamil Nadu’s political history is shaped by strong Dravidian movements that have long resisted religious orthodoxy and caste hierarchy. The DMK and its allies promote a rationalist, secular ideology and have historically opposed what they perceive as attempts to impose Hindi or North Indian religious-cultural norms on the state.

The slogan “Jai Shri Ram,” while inherently devotional in nature, has increasingly been used in contemporary Indian political discourse as a rallying cry by right-wing parties. Within this context, Governor Ravi’s use of the slogan—intentional or not—is perceived as an affront to Tamil Nadu’s secular and linguistic identity, which places high emphasis on cultural autonomy and inclusive governance.

Has the Raj Bhavan responded to the criticism?

As of this writing, Raj Bhavan has not issued an official statement in response to the controversy, nor clarified the Governor’s remarks at the Madurai event. The silence has only added to the perception that the office is becoming politically partisan. Opposition parties argue that the Governor’s consistent delays in legislative matters, coupled with his public remarks and actions, reflect an alignment with a political agenda rather than the impartiality expected of a constitutional authority.

What could be the long-term political and legal implications?

The dual blow of a Supreme Court indictment and a highly publicised controversy over religious sloganeering could significantly weaken Governor RN Ravi’s authority and credibility. It may also rekindle broader national conversations around the need to reform the Governor’s role to prevent partisan interference.

Some constitutional experts suggest that the episode could provide further impetus for revisiting recommendations made by commissions such as the Sarkaria Commission and the Punchhi Commission, both of which advised clearer delineation of the Governor’s discretionary powers and advocated for their limited and accountable use.

In the short term, pressure is expected to mount from both political and civil quarters for Governor Ravi’s resignation or removal. The state government may also explore legal options if future friction continues to disrupt legislative functions or public harmony.