Governor vs. State
Diving into SC’s verdict on Governors
Why in the News?
On April 8, 2025, the Supreme Court settled a long-standing issue between the Governor of Tamil Nadu and the state’s government and Legislative Assembly.
What was the Supreme Court’s ruling on the Tamil Nadu Governor’s delay in assenting to Bills?
- No “Pocket Veto” by Governor: The Court ruled the Governor cannot indefinitely withhold assent to Bills passed by the State Legislature. Eg: The Governor delayed action on ten Bills for years without justification.
- Governor Must Act Timely: The Governor must either assent, return, or refer the Bills to the President within reasonable time. Eg: The Court stated the Governor should act on the Bills, not delay them.
- Article 142 Used to Declare Bills Law: Due to the delay, the Court invoked Article 142 to deem the Bills as law. Eg: The Tamil Nadu government notified the Acts as law following the Court’s decision.
Why did the Court use Article 142 to declare the Bills as law?
- Prolonged Delay by the Governor: The Court found that the Governor had unjustifiably delayed action on the Bills for years, violating the constitutional principles of federalism and representative democracy. Eg: The Governor kept the Bills pending for an extended period without offering valid reasons, causing a constitutional impasse.
- Ensuring Justice and Upholding Democracy: The Court invoked Article 142 to do “complete justice” by respecting the will of the elected representatives of the State Legislative Assembly, thus protecting the democratic process. Eg: The Court deemed the Bills passed by the Legislature as law to ensure that the legislative intent of the people’s representatives was not thwarted.
- Constitutional Vacuum and Remedy: Since the Constitution did not specify a time limit for the Governor’s action, the Court stepped in to remedy the situation, ensuring the Bills were not indefinitely stalled. Eg: The Tamil Nadu government immediately notified the Acts as law after the Court’s intervention, rectifying the Governor’s delay.
When is the Governor constitutionally allowed to refer a Bill to the President?
- When the Bill is Inconsistent with Central Law: The Governor can refer a Bill to the President if it conflicts with existing central laws or raises constitutional issues requiring the President’s decision. Eg: A Bill that contradicts a central law on the same subject matter may be referred to the President for approval.
- When the Governor Has Doubts on the Bill’s Constitutionality: If the Governor has constitutional concerns regarding a Bill, they can refer it to the President for further consideration, especially if it involves matters outside the state’s jurisdiction. Eg: A Bill that encroaches on the powers reserved for the Union can be referred to the President for a final decision.
Which constitutional flaw did the Court aim to rectify through this judgment?
- Lack of Clear Guidelines for Governor’s Action: The Constitution did not specify clear timelines or procedures for the Governor in handling State Bills, leaving room for delays and misuse of power. Eg: The Governor of Tamil Nadu delayed assent to Bills for years, exploiting the absence of a specific time frame for action.
- Absence of Safeguards Against Governor’s Arbitrary Power: The Constitution did not explicitly limit the Governor’s power to withhold assent or exercise a pocket veto, leading to potential abuse and undermining the democratic process. Eg: The Governor’s delay in assenting to ten Bills without any constitutional justification prompted the Court’s intervention.
- Weakness in Protecting Federalism and Legislative Authority: The lack of specific checks on the Governor’s actions threatened the principles of federalism and undermined the autonomy of the State Legislative Assembly. Eg: By indefinitely stalling the Bills, the Governor weakened the power of the elected State Legislature, which led the Court to act to preserve federalism.
Who is responsible for upholding constitutional conventions to protect federalism?
- The Executive (Governor and Chief Minister): Both the Governor, as the representative of the President, and the Chief Minister, as the head of the state government, must respect constitutional conventions to ensure the smooth functioning of federalism and maintain the balance of power between the Centre and States. Eg: The Governor’s undue delay in assenting to Bills disrupted the federal balance and called for judicial intervention.
- The Legislature (State Legislative Assembly): The elected representatives in the State Legislature must ensure that the legislative process adheres to constitutional conventions, fostering federal cooperation and preventing undue interference by the Centre. Eg: The Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly passed Bills that reflected the will of the people, but faced obstruction due to Governor’s delays, highlighting the need for constitutional respect.
- The Judiciary: The judiciary plays a crucial role in upholding constitutional conventions when other branches fail to act appropriately. The Supreme Court intervenes when there is a violation of constitutional principles like federalism and when executive or legislative actors overstep their bounds. Eg: The Supreme Court used Article 142 to declare the Tamil Nadu Bills as law, rectifying the constitutional flaw in the Governor’s inaction and protecting federalism.
Way forward:
- Clarify Constitutional Procedures: There is a need for clear constitutional guidelines and timeframes for Governors to act on State Bills, reducing ambiguity and preventing delays that undermine federalism. This could involve amendments or judicial directions for timely decision-making.
- Strengthen Checks on Executive Power: Strengthening safeguards against arbitrary use of powers by the Governor through legal reforms and accountability measures can ensure that the democratic process and legislative authority of states are respected.
Mains PYQ:
[UPSC 2022] Discuss the essential conditions for exercise of the legislative powers by the Governor. Discuss the legality of re-promulgation of ordinances by the Governor without placing them before the Legislature.
Linkage: The Supreme Court’s 2025 verdict addressed the limits of the Governor’s power regarding assent to bills, effectively preventing the use of a “pocket veto”. This context makes the 2022 question relevant as it explores other aspects of the Governor’s legislative role and the need for accountability to the state legislature.
Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024
Governor vs. State
History and Evolution of the Office of Governor
Note4Students
From UPSC perspective, the following things are important :
Prelims level: Evolution of the Office of Governor
Why in the News?
The recent Supreme Court verdict on the powers of the President and Governors regarding assent to Bills under Articles 201 and 200 highlights the evolution of the office of the Governor and its changing role in India’s federal structure.
Evolution of the Office of Governor:
- Formal Establishment (1858): The office of the Governor was established under the Government of India Act of 1858, which transitioned administration from the East India Company to the British Crown. Governors acted as agents of the Crown and had significant powers in provincial administration.
- Montagu-Chelmsford Reforms (1919): The GoI Act of 1919, under the Montagu-Chelmsford Reforms, aimed to increase Indian participation but kept the Governor central to governance, including vetoing Bills passed by legislative councils.
- GoI Act of 1935: The GoI Act of 1935 gave provincial autonomy but retained the Governor’s discretionary powers, including vetoing Bills and withholding assent, signalling a transition toward more autonomy while maintaining significant Governor authority.
- Post-Independence Transition (1947): As India moved toward independence, the India (Provisional Constitution) Order of 1947 modified the 1935 Act. It removed the phrase “in his discretion,” reducing the Governor’s discretionary powers and signalling a shift to a more symbolic and constitutional role.
- Constituent Assembly Debates: It debated whether Governors should be elected or nominated. Concerns over separatism led to the decision that Governors would be nominated by the President to maintain unity and strengthen ties with the Centre, especially after the partition.
- Post-Independence Framework: Before Independence, various documents and political proposals, including the Commonwealth India Bill (1925) and the Nehru Report (1928), supported retaining the office of the Governor, inspired by the Westminster model of governance.
Constitutional Role of the Governor:
- Article 163: The Governor acts on the advice of the Council of Ministers headed by the Chief Minister, except in certain discretionary situations.
- Ambedkar’s Views: Dr. B.R. Ambedkar advocated for limited use of discretionary powers, ensuring the Governor’s actions align with the advice of the ministers.
- Article 200: The Governor must grant assent to Bills, but may withhold assent, reserve the Bill for the President, or return it for reconsideration. Ambedkar amended this in 1949 to ensure the Governor acts in alignment with the elected government.
- Symbolic and Impartial Role: The Governor is expected to represent the Union, support democratic functioning, and remain non-interfering in day-to-day state affairs.
- Discretionary Powers: The Governor’s discretion is limited to constitutional guidelines and should be used sparingly, ensuring the Governor’s role remains constitutional, not political.
| [UPSC 2017] In the context of Indian history, the-principle of ‘Dyarchy (diarchy)’ refers to:
(a) Division of the central legislature into two houses. (b) Introduction of double government i.e., Central and State governments. (c) Having two sets of rulers; one in London and another in Delhi. (d) Division of the subjects delegated to the provinces into two categories. * |
Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024
Governor vs. State
A Governor’s conduct and a judgment of significance
Why in the News?
In The State of Tamil Nadu vs. The Governor of Tamil Nadu and Another, a two-judge Bench of the Supreme Court of India, led by Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice R. Mahadevan, reaffirmed that Governors’ powers are limited and must follow constitutional boundaries.
What constitutional issue was addressed in the Tamil Nadu vs the Governor case?
| Aspect | Details | Example |
| Limits of Gubernatorial Discretion (Article 200) | The Governor cannot withhold assent to a Bill indefinitely or act independently of the elected State Cabinet, except in constitutionally specified situations. The role is largely ceremonial. | Governor of Tamil Nadu withheld assent to 12 Bills, including those on the appointment of Vice-Chancellors to public universities. |
| Constitutional Obligations of the Governor and State Executive | The Governor is bound by the advice of the State Cabinet and cannot act on personal discretion unless explicitly permitted by the Constitution. This upholds representative democracy. | Governor delayed referrals to the President without valid reasons, thereby undermining the democratic function of the State Legislature. |
| Judicial Review of Governor’s Actions | Article 361 gives personal immunity to the Governor but does not shield official actions from judicial review. Courts can check if actions comply with the Constitution and democratic norms. | Supreme Court held that the Governor’s inaction violated the Constitution, and invoked Article 142 to deem the Bills as assented to, resolving the legislative deadlock. |
Why was the Governor’s inaction on Tamil Nadu Bills ruled unconstitutional?
- Violation of Constitutional Duty under Article 200: The Governor is constitutionally bound to either assent to a Bill, withhold assent (and return it for reconsideration), or reserve it for the President. Indefinitely sitting on Bills without any action violates this mandate. Eg: The Governor kept 10 re-enacted Bills pending without any action or justification, undermining the role of the legislature.
- Undermining the Principles of Representative Democracy: By not acting on duly passed Bills, the Governor disregarded the advice of the elected Council of Ministers, thereby disrupting the democratic process and the legislative will of the people. Eg: Despite the Tamil Nadu Assembly passing the Bills again in a special session, the Governor forwarded them to the President without consulting the State Cabinet, showing a lack of respect for democratic norms.
When can a Governor use discretion under Article 200?
- When a Bill Affects the Powers of the High Court: The second proviso to Article 200 allows the Governor to reserve a Bill that directly affects the powers of the High Court for the President’s consideration. Eg: If a State law tries to curtail the High Court’s jurisdiction or authority, the Governor can use discretion to reserve it.
- When Presidential Assent is Constitutionally Mandatory: If a Bill falls under categories where presidential assent is specifically required (such as laws under Article 31C that seek immunity from judicial review), the Governor may reserve it. Eg: A Bill claiming protection under Article 31C, linked to Directive Principles, must be reserved for the President.
- When a Bill Fundamentally Undermines Constitutional Values: The Governor can act without ministerial advice if the Bill threatens the basic structure or core values of the Constitution. Eg: A Bill that violates secularism or federalism in an extreme manner could justify the Governor’s discretionary action.
How did the Supreme Court invoke Article 142 to resolve the constitutional deadlock in the Tamil Nadu Bills case?
- Used Article 142 to Ensure Complete Justice: The Court exercised its special power under Article 142 to deliver complete justice by deeming the 10 re-enacted Bills as having received the Governor’s assent. Eg: Instead of waiting for further assent or action from the Governor, the Court directly validated the Bills to avoid further delays in governance.
- Bypassed Unworkable Remedies Like Mandamus: Issuing a writ of mandamus (to compel the Governor to act) was seen as ineffective since the Governor is protected from personal liability under Article 361. Eg: Since the Governor cannot be punished for contempt, the Court chose Article 142 as a more enforceable solution.
- Restored the Legislative Authority of the State: By invoking Article 142, the Court reinforced the principle that the Governor cannot override the will of an elected legislature through inaction Eg: This prevented indefinite delays in implementing laws passed by the Tamil Nadu Assembly, thus preserving democratic functioning.
Why was issuing a writ of mandamus deemed inadequate?
- Governor is Immune Under Article 361: The Constitution grants the Governor personal immunity from legal proceedings while in office, making it difficult to enforce any court directive. Eg: Even if the Court issued a mandamus to compel assent or action, the Governor could not be held legally accountable for ignoring it.
- Mandamus Cannot Be Enforced Practically: Courts cannot force a Governor to exercise discretion in a particular way, only to consider doing so—making the remedy ineffective when deliberate inaction is involved. Eg: If the Governor simply delays action without giving reasons, courts have limited tools to compel a timely decision.
- Could Cause a Constitutional Standoff: Forcing the Governor through judicial direction risks undermining the separation of powers and could lead to a deadlock between constitutional authorities. Eg: If the Governor resists the court order, it could trigger a conflict between the judiciary and the executive, weakening the constitutional balance.
Way forward:
- Codify Time Limit for Assent: Amend the Constitution or enact a statutory framework to prescribe a reasonable time limit (eg: 30 days) within which the Governor must act on Bills to prevent indefinite delays.
- Enhance Legislative Oversight: Establish a mechanism for State Legislatures to seek judicial clarification or initiate review when the Governor delays action, reinforcing accountability and upholding democratic norms.
Mains PYQ:
[UPSC 2022] Discuss the essential conditions for exercise of the legislative powers by the Governor. Discuss the legality of re-promulgation of ordinances by the Governor without placing them before the Legislature.
Linkage: This question directly addresses the legislative powers of the Governor, a key aspect of their conduct. The second part specifically asks about the legality of re-promulgation of ordinances, which can be a contentious issue and often involves judicial scrutiny. This relates to the constitutional limits on the Governor’s powers, similar to the issues raised in the article.
Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024
Governor vs. State
SC slams TN Governor, Fixes Time for Assent
Note4Students
From UPSC perspective, the following things are important :
Mains level: Issues related to the Governor;
Why in the News?
The Supreme Court criticised Tamil Nadu Governor R.N. Ravi, calling his actions “unconstitutional.” The court said he did nothing for months about 10 important Bills, and then suddenly sent them to the President only after the State Assembly passed them again and the matter reached the court.
What did the SC rule on the TN Governor’s reservation of Bills for the President in Nov 2024?
- Action declared illegal: The Court ruled that the Governor’s act of reserving 10 Bills for the President after they were already reconsidered and passed again by the Tamil Nadu Assembly was unconstitutional. Eg: If a state legislature passes a Bill, and the Governor returns it, but the legislature passes it again, the Governor must either give assent or withhold it—he cannot send it to the President at that stage.
- Violation of Article 200: According to Article 200, a Bill can be reserved for the President only when it is first presented to the Governor—not after it is passed again following reconsideration. Eg: The Governor had no authority to reserve the 10 Bills in November 2024 because they had already been returned, reconsidered, and passed again.
- Presidential action also invalid: The Court held that since the Governor’s action was unconstitutional, any decision taken by the President based on that action is also invalid. Eg: Even if the President had accepted or rejected those Bills, it would not be valid because the referral itself was flawed.
Why did the SC invoke Article 142 to grant assent to the 10 Bills?
- Undue delay by the Governor: The Bills were kept pending for an excessively long time without any decision by the Governor, causing a constitutional deadlock. Eg: Some Bills were pending since January 2020, which hindered the functioning of the state legislature and governance.
- Violation of constitutional spirit and conventions: The Governor showed disregard for established constitutional conventions and the Supreme Court’s earlier rulings by not acting in a timely or respectful manner. Eg: The Court said the Governor displayed “scant respect” for constitutional procedures by withholding assent without valid reason.
- To ensure justice and restore balance: The Court used Article 142 (which allows it to do complete justice in any matter) to directly grant assent to the 10 Bills to break the impasse and uphold democratic functioning. Eg: Since the Governor failed in his duty, the Court stepped in to protect the will of the people as expressed through their elected legislature.
| Note: Article 142 of the Indian Constitution grants the Supreme Court the power to pass any decree or order necessary to do “complete justice” in any case or matter pending before it, allowing it to transcend the limitations of existing laws and statutes. |
When can a Governor constitutionally reserve a Bill for the President’s consideration?
- Only at the first instance of presentation (Article 200): Under Article 200 of the Constitution, the Governor may reserve a Bill for the President only when it is presented to him for the first time. Eg: If a state Assembly passes a Bill and the Governor receives it for the first time, he can reserve it for the President instead of giving or withholding assent.
- Not after Assembly reconsideration (Article 200 – First Proviso): If the Governor returns a Bill to the Assembly and it is re-passed (with or without changes), the Governor must act—either grant or withhold assent—and cannot reserve it again unless it is substantially changed. Eg: In the Tamil Nadu case, the Governor reserved the Bills after they were reconsidered by the Assembly, which the Supreme Court ruled was unconstitutional.
- Exception – If the Bill is materially different (Article 200 – Judicial Interpretation): If the Bill, after being reconsidered by the legislature, is substantially or materially different from the original, reservation may be allowed. Eg: If new provisions are added that affect national interest or conflict with Union laws, reservation might be justified, even after reconsideration.
How did the SC define the Governor’s expected role and conduct under the Constitution?
- Respect for Parliamentary Democracy and the Will of the Legislature: The Governor must act in accordance with the democratic spirit and not undermine the decisions of the elected legislature. Eg: Shamsher Singh v. State of Punjab (1974) — The SC ruled that the Governor is a constitutional head and must act on the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers, except in specific situations.
- Facilitator, Not an Obstructionist: The Governor should enable smooth functioning of governance and not stall legislative processes. Eg: Samsher Singh case (1974) and reaffirmed in the 2024 SC ruling on Tamil Nadu Bills — The Court held that the Governor’s prolonged inaction amounted to a constitutional failure and disruption of state functioning.
- Bound by Constitutional Oath and Values:The Governor is duty-bound to uphold the Constitution and work for the welfare of the people. Eg: Nabam Rebia v. Deputy Speaker (2016) — The SC observed that the Governor must act within the “four corners” of the Constitution and not misuse discretionary powers.
Way forward:
- Time-bound Action Framework for Governors: A clear timeline should be laid down—either by Parliament or through judicial interpretation—for the Governor to act on Bills (assent, withhold, or reserve). Eg: A fixed period (like 4–6 weeks) can ensure that legislative processes are not indefinitely delayed, maintaining the balance between constitutional roles and democratic governance.
- Institutional Clarity and Accountability: The role and powers of the Governor should be revisited to reduce ambiguity and misuse of discretion. Regular communication protocols between the Governor’s office and the elected government can also be institutionalized. Eg: Like in the case of money Bills where the Governor has limited scope, similar clarity must be applied to regular Bills to avoid conflict or misuse.
Mains PYQ:
[UPSC 2018] Whether the Supreme Court Judgement (July 2018) can settle the political tussle between the Lt. Governor and elected government of Delhi? Examine.
Linkage: The broader theme of the relationship between an unelected head of state (or administrator) and an elected government in a democratic setup.
Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024
Governor vs. State
A look at how Article 361 provides immunity.
Note4Students
From UPSC perspective, the following things are important :
Prelims level: Artile 361
Mains level: What are the provisions related to the Governor in the Indian Constitution?
Why in the News?
Even as a complaint alleging sexual harassment has been filed in Kolkata against West Bengal Governor C V Ananda Bose, Constitutional immunity bars the police from naming the Governor as an accused or even investigating the case.
What is Article 361?
Article 361 of the Constitution that deals with immunity to the President and the Governors states that they “shall not be answerable to any court for the exercise and performance of the powers and duties of his office or for any act done or purporting to be done by him in the exercise and performance of those powers and duties”.
The provision also has two crucial sub-clauses:
(1) that no criminal proceedings whatsoever shall be initiated or continued against the President, or the Governor of a State, in any court during the term of his office.
(2) No process for the arrest or imprisonment of the President, or the Governor of a State, shall issue from any court during his term of office.
Immunity power of the Governor:
- Ceases to be in office: The police can act only after the Governor ceases to be in office, which is when either the Governor resigns or no longer enjoys the confidence of the President.”
- Rameshwar Prasad v Union of India: In the landmark 2006 ruling in Rameshwar Prasad v Union of India, that outlined the immunity enjoyed by the Governor “even on allegation of personal malafides,” the Supreme Court held that “the position in law, is that the Governor enjoys complete immunity.”
- In 2017, criminal conspiracy in the 1992 demolition of the Babri Masjid case: The trial did not take place for former UP Chief Minister Kalyan Singh since he was then the Governor of Rajasthan.
Constitutional Provisions:
- Appointment: The Governor is appointed by the President of India and holds office during the pleasure of the President (Article 155).
- Qualifications: The Governor must be a citizen of India, must be at least 35 years old, and must not hold any office of profit (Article 157).
- Powers and Functions: The Governor is the constitutional head of a state and performs various functions including:
- Executive Functions: The Governor appoints the Chief Minister and other Council of Ministers, and allocates portfolios among them (Article 164).
- Legislative Functions: The Governor summons and prorogues the state legislature, addresses it, and lays down its policy. He/she also has the power to dissolve the Legislative Assembly (Article 174).
- Financial Functions: The Governor causes to be laid before the State Legislature the Annual Financial Statement (budget) and has powers related to money bills (Article 202).
- Discretionary Powers: The Governor has discretionary powers in certain matters, such as appointing the Chief Minister when no party has a clear majority after elections (Article 164).
- Relation with the Union: The Governor is appointed by the President and acts as a link between the state and the Union. He/she can send reports to the President regarding the administration of the state (Article 356).
- Oath or Affirmation: Before entering office, the Governor must take an oath or affirmation according to the form set out in the Third Schedule of the Constitution (Article 159).
Conclusion:
Article 361 of the Indian Constitution provides immunity to the President and Governors from court proceedings and arrest during their term. Police action against a Governor can only occur after they cease office.
Mains PYQ
Q Discuss the essential conditions for exercise of the legislative powers by the Governor. Discuss the legality of re-promulgation of ordinances by the Governor without placing them before the Legislature.
Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024
Governor vs. State
What explains the frequent disagreements between state governments and Governors?
Note4Students
From UPSC perspective, the following things are important :
Prelims level: law on Governor-state relations
Mains level: Reason behind the Governor-state friction
Why in the news?
Allegations by the regional government (Recently Kerala govt.) on the Centre using the Governor’s position to destabilize state governments have been made since the 1950s. This calls for Governor-state relations.
What is the law on Governor-state relations?
- The Governor, although meant to be apolitical and act on the advice of the council of ministers, holds significant powers granted under the Constitution.
- These include giving or withholding assent to bills passed by the state legislature and determining the time needed for a party to prove its majority in cases of a hung verdict in an election.
- While the Constitution grants powers to the Governor, there are no specific provisions on how the Governor and the state government should publicly engage when there is a difference of opinion.
What have been the friction points in recent years?
- Controversial Actions: Some actions by governors have sparked controversy, such as dissolving assemblies amidst government formation discussions (Jammu and Kashmir), and inviting leaders without public consultation (Maharashtra) this government lasted just 80 hours. And Six months later, the Governor refused to nominate CM Uddhav Thackeray.
- Interference in State Affairs: Governors have been criticized for allegedly interfering in state affairs, including commenting on law and order situations (West Bengal), and refusing requests from state governments (Kerala) regarding legislative matters.
- Legal Challenges: Some decisions made by governors have faced legal challenges, such as the invitation to the BJP to form the government in Karnataka, which was challenged and subsequently modified by the Supreme Court.
Dismissal after independence:
- Dismissals in the 1950s: Allegations of the Centre using the Governor’s position to destabilize state governments date back to the 1950s. In 1959, Kerala’s E M S Namboodiripad government was dismissed based on a report by the Governor.
- Dismissals in the Post-1960s: Several state governments were dismissed between 1965 and 1990 through President’s Rule orders issued by Governors. These dismissals included governments such as Birender Singh in Haryana (1967), M Karunanidhi in Tamil Nadu (1976), and N T Rama Rao in Andhra Pradesh (1984).
- Decrease in Dismissals: The frequency of state government dismissals decreased during the coalition era at the Centre and the emergence of strong regional parties. This suggests a shift in political dynamics and possibly less direct interference by the Centre through Governors in state politics.
Causes of such Governor-State Frictions:
- Answerable only to the Centre: The Governor is not directly accountable to the people and is answerable only to the Centre.
- Appointment and Tenure: The Governor is appointed by the President on the Centre’s advice and holds office at the pleasure of the President. Although the tenure is typically five years
- Lack of Impeachment Provision: There is no provision for impeaching the Governor, further limiting mechanisms for holding them accountable.
- Absence of Guidelines: The Constitution does not provide clear guidelines for the exercise of the Governor’s powers, including the appointment of a Chief Minister or the dissolution of the Assembly. Additionally, there are no limits set for how long a Governor can withhold assent to a Bill, raising questions about arbitrary use of power.
- Governor as Agent of the Centre: The National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution highlighted concerns that Governors may act in accordance with instructions from the Union Council of Ministers, leading to perceptions that they are “agents of the Centre.”
Reform suggested by the ARC of 1968 to the Sarkaria Commission of 1988:
- Selection Process: Establishing a panel consisting of the Prime Minister, Home Minister, Lok Sabha Speaker, and Chief Minister to select Governors.
- Fixed Tenure: Recommendations advocate for fixing the Governor’s tenure for five years.
- Impeachment Provision: Suggestions include introducing a provision to impeach the Governor by the State Assembly.
Conclusion: Governors often side with the central government and aren’t accountable enough. Kerala’s case shows a problem with the law. Proposed changes aim to make things clearer and fairer.
Mains PYQs
Q Discuss the essential conditions for exercise of the legislative powers by the Governor. Discuss the legality of re-promulgation of ordinances by the Governor without placing them before the Legislature. (UPSC IAS/2022)
Q Whether the Supreme Court Judgement (July 2018) can settle the political tussle between the Lt. Governor and elected government of Delhi? Examine. (UPSC IAS/2018)
https://indianexpress.com/article/explained/state-government-governors-powers-disagreements-9240141/
Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024
Governor vs. State
TN moves Supreme Court against Governor over Bill withholds
Note4Students
From UPSC perspective, the following things are important :
Prelims level: Article 32, Legislative Powers of Governor
Mains level: State vs . Governor Row
Central Idea
- The Tamil Nadu state government has taken its concerns to the Supreme Court regarding the prolonged delay in the approval of Bills and Government orders by the Governor.
TN Petition to the Supreme Court
- Constitutional Challenge: The TN government has filed a Writ Petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India.
- Objective: The petition seeks a declaration that the Governor’s inaction, omission, and delay in assenting to Bills and considering Government orders forwarded by the Tamil Nadu State Legislature is unconstitutional, illegal, arbitrary, unreasonable, and a misuse of power.
- Impact on Administration: The Governor’s delay in signing remission orders, day-to-day files, appointment orders, and granting approvals for prosecution is causing severe disruptions in the state administration.
Article 32 of Indian Constitution
|
What are the Discretionary Powers of the Governor?
The Constitution makes it clear that if any question arises whether a matter falls within the governor’s discretion or not, the decision of the governor is final and the validity of anything done by him cannot be called in question on the ground that he ought or ought not to have acted in his discretion.
Constitutional Discretion:
- Reservation of a bill for the consideration of the President (Article 200).
- Recommendation for the imposition of the President’s Rule (Article 356) in the state.
- While exercising his functions as the administrator of an adjoining union territory (in case of additional charge).
- Determining the amount payable by the Government of Assam, Meghalaya, Tripura and Mizoram to an autonomous Tribal District Council as royalty accruing from licenses for mineral exploration.
- Seeking information from the chief minister with regard to the administrative and legislative matters of the state.
Situational Discretion:
- Appointment of chief minister when no party has a clear-cut majority in the state legislative assembly or when the chief minister in office dies suddenly and there is no obvious successor.
- Dismissal of the council of ministers when it cannot prove the confidence of the state legislative assembly.
- Dissolution of the state legislative assembly if the council of ministers has lost its majority.
Can the Governor withhold His Assent to a Bill in Exercise of His Discretionary Powers?
- While a plain reading of Article 200 suggests that the Governor can withhold his assent, experts question whether he can do so only on the advice of the Council of Ministers.
- The Constitution provides that the Governor can exercise his executive powers only on the advice of the Council of Ministers under Article 154.
- The larger question is why a Governor should be allowed to withhold assent when the Bill is passed by the Assembly.
Rationale behind Governor’s Power
- Checks and Balances: Delay in approval allows the Governor to scrutinize bills and orders more thoroughly, ensuring that they are in line with the constitution and the interests of the state.
- Prevention of Hasty Decisions: It prevents hasty or ill-considered legislation from being passed, which might have unintended negative consequences.
- Protection of Minority Rights: The Governor can act as a safeguard against the majority’s potentially oppressive decisions, protecting the rights and interests of minority groups.
- Aid to Parliamentary Democracy: The delay provides time for public debate, expert opinions, and stakeholder consultations, which are essential aspects of parliamentary democracy.
- Conflict Resolution: In situations where there are disputes between the state government and the center or between various state institutions, the Governor’s involvement can facilitate resolution.
Issues with the delays
- Delay in Decision-Making: The Governor’s failure to take a decision on the Bills passed by the legislature leads to a delay in decision-making, which affects the effective functioning of the state government.
- Delay in Implementation of Policies and Laws: When the Governor fails to make a decision on a Bill passed by the assembly, it delays the implementation of policies and laws.
- Undermines the Democratic Process: The Governor, who is appointed by the Centre, can use his powers to delay or reject Bills passed by state assemblies for political reasons, which undermines the democratic process.
- Public Perception: The public often views pending Bills with the Governor as a sign of inefficiency or even corruption in the state government, which can damage the government’s reputation.
- Constitutional Ambiguity: There is ambiguity in the Constitution regarding the Governor’s power to withhold assent.
- Lack of Accountability: When the Governor withholds assent, he does not provide any reason for his decision.
Recent Instances of Withholding Assent
- Chhattisgarh (2020): The Chhattisgarh Governor withheld assent to a bill amending the Chhattisgarh Lokayukta Act, 2001.
- Tamil Nadu (2021): The Tamil Nadu Governor reserved a bill exempting state students from NEET medical entrance exams for the President’s consideration after a significant delay.
- Kerala (2023): Kerala’s Governor signed five bills into law but withheld assent to six others, citing concerns about their constitutionality and legality.
Mains Marks Enhancer: Supreme Court’s Stance and Commission Recommendations
- Nabam Rebia and Bamang Felix vs Dy.Speaker (2016): The SC clarified that a Governor’s discretion under Article 200 is limited to deciding whether a bill should be reserved for the President’s consideration. The Court emphasized that actions or inactions by the Governor regarding bill assent can be subject to judicial review.
- Punchhi Commission (2010): This commission recommended the establishment of a time limit within which the Governor should decide on granting assent or reserving a bill for the President’s consideration.
- National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution (NCRWC): NCRWC proposed a four-month time limit for the Governor to decide on a bill’s fate. It also suggested the removal of the Governor’s power to withhold assent except in cases explicitly stipulated in the Constitution.
Conclusion
- The dispute between the government and the Governor underscores the importance of timely decision-making to ensure the effective functioning of the state administration.
Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024
Governor vs. State
Does India really need State Governors?
Note4Students
From UPSC perspective, the following things are important :
Prelims level: Office of the Governor
Mains level: Read the attached story
Central Idea
- The recent termination of a state minister’s appointment by Tamil Nadu Governor R N Ravi has sparked renewed debates on the role and necessity of Governors in Indian states.
- While conflicts between state governments and the Governor’s office are not new, it is important to examine the position of the Governor and its constitutional implications.
Who is a State Governor?
- In India, the position of State Governors is established by the Constitution of India.
- The constitutional provisions regarding State Governors can be found primarily in Articles 153 to 162 of the Indian Constitution.
Here are the key aspects of the constitutional position of State Governors in India:
- Appointment: The Governor of a state is appointed by the President of India. The President acts on the advice of the Council of Ministers headed by the Prime Minister.
- Executive Power: The Governor is the head of the state executive and exercises executive powers on behalf of the President. The Governor is the representative of the President at the state level.
- Constitutional Head: The Governor acts as the constitutional head of the state and performs ceremonial functions such as the opening and closing of the state legislature, giving assent to bills, and issuing ordinances.
- Administrative Role: The Governor plays a crucial role in the administration of the state. The Governor appoints the CM and other members of the Council of Ministers, as well as certain high-ranking state officials.
Powers and Functions
- Legislative Functions: The Governor has a role in the legislative process. The Governor summons and prorogues the state legislature, addresses the legislature at the beginning of its first session after each general election, and gives assent to bills passed by the state legislature.
- Discretionary Powers: The Governor has certain discretionary powers. For example, the Governor can reserve certain bills passed by the state legislature for the consideration of the President. The Governor can also withhold assent to bills under certain circumstances.
- Emergency Powers: In cases of breakdown of constitutional machinery in a state, the Governor can recommend the imposition of President’s Rule, where the state government is temporarily suspended, and the Governor acts as the executive head of the state.
- Link with Central Government: The Governor serves as a vital link between the state government and the central government. The Governor communicates with the President and the central government on various matters related to the state.
Arguments for the Existence of the Governor’s Post
- Preservation of Provincial Autonomy: The Constituent Assembly aimed to maintain the Governor as the constitutional representative of states in post-independence India.
- Need for Centralization and Impartiality: Supporters argue that a certain level of centralized power is essential for a developing nation like India, and the Governor ensures impartiality in governance.
- Continuity and Stability: The Governor’s presence provides stability and continuity in governance, and they play a significant role in administering oaths and delivering inaugural addresses.
Arguments against the Governor’s Post
- Interference and Politicization: Critics claim that Governors often interfere in the functioning of state governments, especially those led by opposing political parties, leading to politicization of the office.
- Lack of Impartiality: Concerns arise about the impartiality of Governors appointed from political backgrounds, potentially influencing their decisions and actions.
- Redundancy and Inefficiency: Some argue that the role of the Governor can be carried out by alternative mechanisms, and the office incurs unnecessary expenditure.
Supreme Court’s Stand and Judicial Review
- Limited Powers and Aid-Advice: The Supreme Court has established that Governors are required to exercise their powers upon the aid and advice of their ministers, except in exceptional circumstances.
- Judicial Oversight: Through landmark cases, the Supreme Court has set limits on gubernatorial powers, ensuring their actions adhere to the Constitution and the law.
Recommendations by Commissions and Committees
- Administrative Reforms Commission (ARC): The ARC, in its report in 1969, emphasized harmonious relations between Governors and state governments, suggesting enhanced cooperation and limited interference.
- Sarkaria Commission (1983): The commission proposed modifications to augment the responsibilities and influence of Governors while emphasizing impartiality and fixed tenures.
- Punchhi Commission (2010): Recommendations included consultation with the Chief Minister during the appointment of Governors and expanding their responsibilities in specific areas.
- Other Proposals: Various recommendations have been made, such as appointing Governors through a collegium, limiting their role to ceremonial duties, or abolishing the post in smaller states or union territories.
Conclusion
- The debate surrounding the role of Governors in Indian states continues to evolve.
- While arguments for the existence of the Governor’s post revolve around preserving provincial autonomy, centralization, and stability, critics highlight concerns of interference, politicization, and redundancy.
- Judicial oversight and recommendations from commissions and committees have aimed to strike a balance between the Governor’s constitutional responsibilities and the need for impartiality.
Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024