The President's pleasure under Art. 156 of the Constitution is unjusticiable and the Governor is not answerable to any court for the exercise of powers and duties of his office under Art. 361 of the Constitution.

1. The petitioner has come up to this Court praying for the issuance of a writ mandamus to direct the Hon'ble President of India, 1st respondent herein to dismiss the 3rd respondent, Governor of Tamil Nadu for violation of constitutional provisions pertaining to the office of Governorship.

2. The Office raised a question with regard to maintainability and it has been posted before me for the purpose of deciding the maintainability.

3. Mr. S. K. Sundaram, learned counsel for the petitioner urges that a newspaper report appeared in Indian Express recently on 23rd July, 1989 stating that "Tamil Nadu Governor P.C. Alexander wants to enter active politics. He has conveyed this to Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi." This newspaper report is published under the caption "Alexander to contest LS polls". In the same report, it is stated that "When Raj Bhavan was contacted for Dr. Alexander's reaction, his Secretary R. Santhanam said that the Governor would not comment on his reported entry into active Politics." Mainly based on this newspaper report, the petitioner has flied this writ petition as a public interest litigation.

4. Mr. S. K. Sundaram argues that the Governor should not enter into politics while in office. Since the news item appearing in Indian Express has not been denied by the Governor of Tamil Nadu, this writ petition is maintainable on the ground that the Governor is violating the provisions of the constitution. Learned counsel further contends that there is no decision on the scope of Art. 158 of the constitution so far and as such, this is fit case in which this Court should entertain the writ petition and decide the issue. The sum and substance of the argument of Mr. Sundaram is that according to newspaper reports, the Governor of Tamil Nadu is intending to stand for the ensuing parliamentary elections and is using the official machinery for this purpose and has even gone to New Delhi to meet the Prime Minister at the cost of the public and as such, the Governor of Tamil Nadu is misusing his office and he should not be allowed to continue as the Governor of Tamil Nadu.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner referred to two decisions of the Supreme Court Slate of Rajasthan v. Union of India, and Union of India v. Valluri Basavaiah, for the proposition he is asking for.

6. In Part VI of the Constitution, under Art. 153, it is stated that there shall be a Governor for each State and under Art. 154, the executive power of the State shall be vested in the Governor and shall be exercised by him either directly or through officers subordinate to him in accordance with the Constitution. Under Art. 155, the Governor of the State shall be appointed by the President by warrant under his hand and seal. Under Art. 156, it is stated that the Governor shall hold office during the pleasure of the President. Article 157 speaks of qualifications for appointment as Governor and Art. 158 provides for conditions of Governor's office. It is in the following terms.

"158(1). The Governor shall not be a member of cither House of Parliament or of a House of the Legislature of any State specified in the First Schedule, and if a member of either House of Parliament or of a House of the Legislature of any such State be appointed Governor, he shall be deemed to have vacated his seat in that House on the date on which he enters upon his office as Governor."

For the purpose of this case, it is enough to extract Art. 158(1). A reading of these Articles already shows that the Governor is appointed by the President of India and he shall hold office during the pleasure of the President. It is clear from a reading of Art. 158(1) that a Governor should not be a member of either House of Parliament or of a House of the Legislature of any State. If a member of either House of Parliament or of a House of the Legislature of any such State is appointed Governor, he shall be deemed to have vacated his scat in that House on that date on which he enters upon his office