Jabalpur, Sep 17 (SocialNews.XYZ) The Madhya Pradesh High Court has dismissed a public interest litigation seeking a direction to appoint a new Governor for the state, holding that the petition was misconceived in light of the constitutional provisions governing the tenure of Governors.
A division bench comprising Justices Anand Pathak and BP Sharma rejected the writ petition filed by MA Khan, a retired professor of Jawaharlal Nehru Krishi Vishwa Vidyalaya, Jabalpur.
The petitioner had sought a direction to the respondents, including the Secretary to the President of India, to appoint a Governor of Madhya Pradesh, contending that the present incumbent had completed more than five years in office and that his term had expired on July 7, 2026.
Relying on Articles 153, 154, 155, 156 and 160 of the Constitution, the petitioner argued that the Governor is an important constitutional functionary who also serves as the Chancellor of universities and as an appellate authority for certain orders of the state government.
He further submitted that the incumbent should be removed and the Chief Justice of the Madhya Pradesh High Court appointed as Governor.
Opposing the petition, counsel for the Union of India and the State submitted that under the proviso to Article 156(3) of the Constitution, a Governor continues to hold office until his successor enters upon the office, even after the expiry of the five-year term.
They contended that the petition was premature and not maintainable.
The bench observed that the petitioner had failed to disclose his bona fides as a public-spirited citizen, a requirement under the High Court of Madhya Pradesh Rules, 2008, for filing a public interest litigation. More importantly, the court held that the petition was misconceived on merits.
Referring extensively to the proviso to Article 156(3), the judges noted that it mandates that a Governor shall, “notwithstanding the expiration of his term, continue to hold office until his successor enters upon his office.”
The court relied on the Supreme Court’s decision in ‘Krishna Ballabh Sahay and Others v. Commission of Inquiry and Others’, which had clarified that the proviso excludes any question regarding the legality of a governor continuing beyond five years and ensures that there is never a constitutional vacuum in the office.
The High Court bench observed that the Constitution does not contemplate a vacancy in the gubernatorial post and that the incumbent continues validly until a successor assumes charge.
In view of this clear constitutional position, the arguments advanced by the petitioner were rejected. Accordingly, the petition was dismissed as misconceived.
Source: IANS
Gopi Adusumilli is a Programmer. He is the editor of SocialNews.XYZ and President of AGK Fire Inc.
He enjoys designing websites, developing mobile applications and publishing news articles on current events from various authenticated news sources.
When it comes to writing he likes to write about current world politics and Indian Movies. His future plans include developing SocialNews.XYZ into a News website that has no bias or judgment towards any.
He can be reached at gopi@socialnews.xyz
This website uses cookies.
