Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

19. There are quite a few angry bursts and emotional diatribes and in affidavits filed by some of the petitioners particularly petitioners in W.P. Nos. 7552/97, 8158/97,7465/97,7211/97 reference is made to the views of the Governor of the State as an individual on the evil drinking of intoxicating liquor. They have used expressions which show that assent to the amendment bill by the Governor of the Slate who as an individual has held strong views in favour of prohibition is unexpected and objectionable. It is time, however, that we realise that constitutional functionaries too can have their individual opinions. They are however, not expected to use their personal views while discharging their constitutional functions. They like any other person have the freedom of speech and expression of their thought on any subject of public importance so long as they do not infringe their constitutional obligations. It will be objectionable if a constitutional functionary is guided by his or her personal opinion and allows his or her views to affect his or her constitutional duty. Such functionary has to keep personal views away and work within the bounds of the laws under which he or she has to function. Article 154 of the Constitution has recognised the executive power of the State to be exercised by the Governor either directely or through officers subordinate to him in accordance with the Constitution and Article 163 has made it imperative that the Governor shall act with the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers with the Chief Minister at the head except in so far as he has discretion to act under the Constitution. Clause (2) of Article 163 provides :--