The office of governor is of high prestige and dignity. The supreme court has observed that it is an independent constitutional office which is not subject to the control of the Government of India. The governors are expected to discharge their duties of office in the interest of residents of the concerned state and not according to the whims and fancies of the union government.
In this context, Dr. B. R. Ambedkar observed that, “The Governor as envisaged in the constitution has no functions but only certain duties. As far as functions attached to his office are concerned he is supposed to act on aid and advice of the council of ministers headed by the chief minister”.
However, the use of discretionary powers by governors with partisan motives has been a bone of contention between the elected head and constitutional head. Controversies originating from conflicts and confrontations between ‘Raj Bhavan’ and state cabinet often emanate due to blatant disregard by the governor for the aid and advice tendered by the council of ministers. Following are some of the issues that have caused soreness in the relationship between governors and states.
Reasons for the friction between Governor and State
Agent of the Centre
The governor acts as an agent of the centre rather than acting as an executive head of the State due to following reasons-
- Mode of appointment: The Governor is appointed by the President on the recommendation of the Union cabinet. Usually, the appointments are done on a political basis.
- No security of tenure: The Governor does not enjoy any security of tenure, he/she can be removed by the President at any time. Such removals are often criticised as being politically motivated.
- No explicit constitutional provision: There is no explicit provision in the constitution that says that the advice tendered by the state cabinet is binding on the Governor. The Constitution (42nd Amendment) Act, 1976 made it mandatory for the President to act on the aid and advice of the Union cabinet. However , this amendment did not make such a change in relation to the governor.
- Though, the Supreme Court in various judgements has clarified that the Governor needs to act on aid and advice of the state council of ministers except on the constitutionally recognized discretionary matters.
As a result, when the ruling parties at the centre and state level are different, it has been observed that the Governor frequently acts in his/her own discretion without following the advice tendered by the State cabinet.
Example: In 2021, Tamil Nadu Governor referred the mercy plea of the Rajiv Gandhi assassination convicts to the President of India by ignoring the recommendation of the Tamil Nadu state cabinet to release the convicts.
Misuse of the power to summon the Legislative Assembly of the State
On various occasions, it has been observed that the Governor doesn’t follow the advice of the State cabinet to summon the session/sitting of the Legislative Assembly of the state and acts in his/her own discretion.
Example: In 2020, Kerala Governor turned down a special request to summon a special sitting of the Assembly to debate 3 central farm laws.
Power to deal with the State bills
No state bill can become an act without the assent of the Governor as per the Constitution of India. But, this power delegated to Governor has been criticised by experts on following grounds-
- Legitimacy: Governor is not an elected official like the President of India. Hence, his/her power to withhold assent to the bills passed by the state legislature which has the mandate of people is questioned. Additionally, Courts are also debarred from questioning the Governor if he/she withholds his/her assent to a state bill.
- No time limit for granting assent to a state bill: Constitution doesn’t prescribe any time limit within which the Governor has to give his/her assent to a state bill. Due to which, there has been a delay in giving the assent to those state bills which are criticised by the Union government.
- Reservation of State bills for the assent of President: Constitutionally, it is a discretionary power of the Governor and hence, it has been used by the Governor to stall those state bills on which the ruling party at the centre doesn’t agree.
Example- In 2022, Tamil Nadu Governor referred the NEET bill passed by the TN state assembly for Presidential approval. Such reservation of a bill and corresponding delay over it was criticised by the Tamil Nadu government.
Absence of clear-cut constitutional guidelines
The Constitution doesn’t contain detailed provisions for exercise of powers by the Governor that includes appointment of chief minister or dissolving the state assembly. Due to absence of such guidelines the Governors often use their discretionary power to suit the agenda of the ruling party at the union level.
Example: In 2018, J&K Governor dissolved the assembly amid indications that various parties were coming together to form the government.
Lack of laid down mechanisms to resolve differences
There are no specified provisions regarding how the governor and the state must engage publicly when there is a difference of opinion. Sometimes, the feud between Governor and chief minister becomes visible in public which erodes the trust of the public in the democratic system.
Example: In 2021, West Bengal Governor slammed the state chief minister publicly saying that her government was not providing information that he has been seeking over the last two years.
Recommendations for Resolving Governor-State Conflicts
Several commissions such as Sarkaria Commission, Punchhi Commission, First Administrative Reforms commission (ARC), and National Commission to Review Working of Constitution (NCRWC) have recommended various measures to deal with differences and conflicts between the Governor and state cabinet. Some of these recommendations are given in the following table-
| Dimension | Recommendations |
| Appointment of Governor | Sarkaria Commission
NCRWC
|
| Tenure of Governor’s office | Sarkaria Commission
Punchhi Commission
1st ARC
|
| Decisions regarding state bills | Punchhi Commission
|
| Discretionary power | Punchhi Commission
|
| Dismissal of State council of ministers | Sarkaria Commission
NCRWC
|
Supreme Court judgements related to Governor’s office
| Dimension | Overview of Judgement of the SC |
| Discretionary power of the Governor | Shamsher Singh vs. State of Punjab (1974): Governor has no right to refuse on advice of the council of ministers, it will be ‘antithetical’ to the concept of ‘responsible government’.
Nabam Rebia vs. Deputy speaker (2016): In a parliamentary democracy with a responsible form of government, powers of Governor as constitutional head of the State shouldn’t be enlarged at the cost of the real executive i.e. council of ministers. The Governor has no discretion in the matter of summoning the house if the Chief minister enjoys the majority in the house and is bound to act on the advice of the cabinet. |
| Removal of governor | B. P. Singhal Case (2010): The Governor cannot be removed on the ground that he/she is out of sync with the policies and ideologies of the Union government or the party in power at the Centre. Nor can he/she be removed on the ground that the Union government has lost confidence in him/her. |
| Dismissal of state council of ministers | S. R. Bommai case (1994): The question of the state government losing the confidence of the legislative assembly should be tested on the floor of the house.
Rameshwar Prasad case (2006): Unsubstantiated claims of horse trading or corruption in efforts at government formation can not be cited as a reason to dissolve the assembly. |
| Promulgating ordinances | DC Wadhwa vs. Bihar (1987): Legislative power of executive to promulgate ordinances is to be used in exceptional circumstances and not as a substitute for the law making power of the legislature. |
| Post-poll alliances | Rameshwar Prasad case (2006): Governor can not decline a post-poll alliance to form the government and prove the majority on the floor of the house. |
It is necessary to invest the office of the governor with the requisite independence of action and to rid them of bane of ‘instructions’ from the union government. The loyalty of the governor must be to the constitution and to none else and his commitment to the well-being of the people of his state. He must command respect by his conduct. – NCRWC.
Constitutional safeguards, judicial pronouncements and well-spelt norms & traditions put forth by various commissions show the way of co-operation between the governor and the chief minister. Such co-operation is a prerequisite for protecting the ethos of federalism and enhancing the spirit of cooperative federalism.
