Tamil Nadu Governor Refuses Customary Address

Constitutional Standoff: Tamil Nadu Governor Refuses Customary Address

Official Report Access. The detailed account of the Assembly walkout and the subsequent legislative resolution can be found at:
The Refusal. On Tuesday, February 10, 2026, Governor R.N. Ravi entered the House for the first session of the year but **declined to read the customary speech** prepared by the DMK-led government.
The Exit. Following a brief interaction where he digressed from the text, the Governor **walked out of the House**, leading the Speaker to read the Tamil version of the address in his absence.

Source

Contentious Content. The Governor’s office issued a statement alleging the address contained **”numerous unsubstantiated claims and misleading statements”** that he could not endorse.
Omissions of Crisis. Raj Bhavan claimed the speech ignored critical issues, including a **”sharp rise in atrocities against Dalits”** and educational vacancies, focusing instead on “exaggerated” investment figures.
Microphone Disruption. The Governor alleged his **microphone was repeatedly switched off**, preventing him from placing his objections or personal views on the record.

Protocol Conflict. A central point of contention was the Governor’s insistence that the **National Anthem** be played at the beginning of the session.
State Tradition. Tamil Nadu traditionally plays the state anthem, ***Tamil Thai Vaazhthu***, at the start and the National Anthem at the end; the Governor termed the refusal to change this as “brazen disrespect” to the Constitution.
Repeated Friction. This marks the third consecutive year where the sequence of anthems and the content of the address have led to a gubernatorial walkout.

Mandatory Duty. **Article 176(1)** mandates that the Governor *shall* address the Legislative Assembly at the commencement of the first session of each year.
Policy Statement. Constitutional experts maintain this address is a **statement of policy** of the elected government, not a personal manifesto of the Governor.
Inform the Legislature. The purpose of the address is for the Governor to inform the House of the “causes of its summons,” effectively setting the legislative agenda for the year.

Shamsher Singh Case (1974). A seven-judge bench ruled that the Governor is a **formal head** and must strictly act on the “aid and advice” of the Council of Ministers.
Nabam Rebia Case (2016). The Court clarified that the Governor’s discretionary powers are **extremely limited** and do not extend to altering or rejecting the state-prepared address.
Irregularity vs. Illegality. Past High Court rulings suggest that while the address is mandatory, a Governor laying it on the table or walking out may be considered a **procedural irregularity** rather than a fatal illegality.

CM’s Counter-Action. Chief Minister M.K. Stalin immediately moved a resolution to **record only the government-approved text** in the House proceedings.
Unanimous Adoption. The Assembly passed the resolution unanimously, ensuring the Governor’s digressions or walkout did not alter the official legislative record.
Call for Amendment. Stalin announced plans to seek a **Constitutional amendment** to remove the requirement for the Governor’s annual address entirely, calling the practice an outdated colonial relic.

Procedural Pleas. Speaker M. Appavu repeatedly requested the Governor to follow the established procedure, reminding him that **only elected members** have the right to voice opinions on the floor.
Reading the Tamil Text. Following the walkout, the Speaker performed his duty by reading the **Tamil translation** of the approved speech to ensure the session could legally proceed.
Neutrality of the Chair. The Speaker emphasized that the Governor cannot use the Assembly as a platform for independent commentary or political critiques.

Disputed Investment Claims. The Governor’s office specifically challenged the government’s claim of attracting **₹12 lakh crore in investments**, asserting that most remain unfulfilled MOUs.
FDI Ranking. Raj Bhavan highlighted that Tamil Nadu’s rank in attracting **Foreign Direct Investment (FDI)** has slipped from 4th to 6th place over the last four years.
Public Perception. The ongoing feud creates an atmosphere of political instability that critics argue could deter potential global investors despite the state’s industrial successes.

Kerala Flashpoints. Similar tensions have been observed in **Kerala**, where the Governor has also omitted portions of the state-prepared speech or expressed public disagreement with the Cabinet.
Non-BJP States. The DMK and other opposition parties have accused the Union government of using Governors to **interfere in the administration** of states not ruled by the BJP.
National Debate. These recurring incidents have sparked a national debate among constitutionalists regarding whether the role of the Governor needs a complete structural overhaul.

Feature	Raj Bhavan’s Position	State Government’s Position
Speech Content	Claims inaccuracies and “misleading” statements.	Asserts it is a valid policy document of the Cabinet.
Microphone	Alleges it was switched off to stifle the Governor.	Views the Governor’s digression as a breach of protocol.
National Anthem	Demands it be played at the start of the session.	Follows tradition of playing it at the session’s close.
Walkout Action	Necessary protest against constitutional “insult.”	Described as a “violation of tradition and ethos.”
Legal Status	Governor claims duty to protect the Constitution.	Resolution passed to record only the approved text.