Chennai: Far from being a ceremonial office, the Raj Bhavan has been carrying an aura of a hot seat, whether misplaced or not, ever since RN Ravi assumed office as the Governor of Tamil Nadu. Throughout the past year in office, he has been engaged in a duel with the DMK government, sitting over many bills and trying to undermine the Dravidian movement and its legacy. Giving rise to apprehension about the turf war getting prolonged, he has stepped into the second year.
When he was appointed as the new occupant of the Raj Bhavan, allies of the ruling DMK expressed concern and their fears have come true. Though his predecessor Bunwarilal Purohit too tried his hand at expanding the Raj Bhavan's sphere of influence, he has not waded into policy matters. But, Ravi has given the impression that he is more a representative of the ruling party at the Centre. Apart from holding back the Bills passed by the assembly, he has a penchant for debunking the Dravidian movement and its ideology as its long-held view of Tamil identity.
The DMK woke up to an assertive Raj Bhavan when the governor not only sat on the Bill seeking exemption from the National Eligibility cum Entrance Examination (NEET) for the MBBS program, but returned it for reconsideration. It was passed once again and sent to him for being forwarded to the President for assent. The elected government was also rattled when the governor unilaterally extended the tenure of Vice Chancellors of a few Universities and appointed VCs for some.
Then came another shocker from the governor. He graced the convocation of the Madurai Kamaraj University without the state education minister, who is the pro-chancellor, and held the conclave of VCs with no invite to any representative from the government. Stalin responded by getting Bills passed by the Assembly stripping the powers of the Governor-Chancellor to appoint VCs. However, they are lying in cold storage at the Raj Bhavan.
Ravi has stoked controversy on many issues inviting the wrath of not only the DMK and its allies but Tamil scholars and historians. First, he was dismissive of the Dravidian ideology, maintaining that the Aryan-Dravidian divide as well as caste hierarchies and discrimination was a creation of the colonial British.