How can High Court issue notice to Governor of State? Madras High Court asks

The Madras High Court Thursday reserved orders on the maintainability of a petition claiming that the Tamil Nadu (TN) Governor RN Ravi, in serving as the chairperson of the Governing Board of Auroville Foundation, while being the Governor, holds an "office of profit." .A bench of Acting Chief Justice T Raja and Justice Bharatha Chakravarthy said that the Court will have to see "how it can issue a notice to a serving Governor of a state" given that Article 361 of the Constitution of India clearly states that the President of India and Governor of a state shall not be answerable to any Court for any act done in discharge of their official duties.The bench was hearing a petition filed by one M Kannadasan, district President of the socio-political group, Thanthai Periyar Dravidar Kazhagam against Governor RN Ravi for holding "office of profit" as chairperson of governing body in Auroville Foundation, while also being the Governor of State.A gazette notification issued in October 2021 by the Ministry of Education that administrates Auroville, had announced the appointment of a nine-member board with a term of four years to administer the functioning of the Auroville Foundation. The same notification had announced the appointment of Ravi as the Foundation's chairperson. The petitioner said in his plea that the Constitution of India prohibits Governors of States from occupying any offices of profit. However, following his appointment by the Central government as the Auroville Foundation chairperson in October 2021, while he was already the TN Governor, Ravi has been drawing a salary as the Foundation's chairperson, availing provident fund and other benefits, it was stated.Therefore, Ravi being the Foundation's chairperson means he has been occupying an office of profit and is therefore, liable to be disqualified from the post of TN Governor, the plea said. It also stated that since taking charge of the TN Governor's office in September 2021, Ravi has also been making public statements espousing the cause of Sanatan Dharma, which goes against the non-religious Dravidian movement and the founding principles of the Auroville Foundation.The petitioner's lawyer, Senior Advocate S Doraisamy argued that the provisions of Article 361 would be applicable only when a case pertained to the performance of the official duties of a Governor or, the President.He contended that in the present case, heading the governing board was not the Governor's official duty.Doraisamy cited the judgement passed by the Madras High Court in a case filed by Rajiv Gandhi assassination case convict S Nalini against the Governor.He urged the Court to "issue notice to the Governor to explain "under what authority he was continuing to hold the post of Governor while simultaneously holding an office of profit."