Context
- The recent Tamil Nadu Assembly election revived debates regarding the Governor’s discretionary powers in government formation. The issue gains importance particularly during hung Assemblies, where no party secures a clear legislative majority.
Constitutional Provisions Related to Government Formation
- Article 164(1)
- Article 164(1) provides that the Chief Minister shall be appointed by the Governor.
- Other ministers are appointed by the Governor on the advice of the Chief Minister.
- In cases of clear majority, the Governor normally invites the leader of the majority party to form the government.
- Discretionary Powers in Hung Assembly
- The Governor exercises discretionary powers when no party secures an outright majority in the Assembly.
- The Constitution does not prescribe a fixed procedure for selecting the Chief Minister in such situations.
- The discretion is intended to ensure formation of a stable government enjoying legislative confidence.
Recommendations of Constitutional Commissions
- Sarkaria Commission (1987)
- The Sarkaria Commission recommended guidelines for government formation during a hung Assembly situation.
- The Commission prioritised a pre-poll alliance enjoying majority support.
- Punchhi Commission (2010)
- The Punchhi Commission broadly reiterated the order of preference suggested by the Sarkaria Commission.
- The recommended sequence includes:
- Pre-poll alliance with majority
- Single largest party with external support
- Post-poll coalition with all partners in government
- Post-poll alliance with outside support
Issues Associated with Governor’s Discretion
- Inconsistent Application of Conventions
- Governors have frequently deviated from established constitutional conventions while inviting parties to form governments.
- Different approaches adopted across States have generated concerns regarding institutional consistency.
- Allegations of Political Bias
- In Goa and Manipur (2017), Governors invited BJP-led post-poll alliances despite Congress emerging as the single largest party.
- In Karnataka (2018), the Governor invited the BJP as the single largest party despite an opposition coalition claim.
- In Maharashtra (2019), a government was sworn in amid uncertainty regarding majority support.
- Concerns over Federalism
- Critics argue that Governors sometimes function as agents of the Union government rather than impartial constitutional authorities.
- Such perceptions weaken cooperative federalism and trust between States and the Union.
Judicial Pronouncements on Majority Test
- S. R. Bommai Case (1994)
- The Supreme Court held that the floor of the House is the appropriate forum for testing legislative majority.
- The judgment strengthened parliamentary democracy and limited arbitrary constitutional actions.
- Rameshwar Prasad Case (2006)
- The Court reiterated the importance of conducting a floor test to determine majority support.
- Judicial pronouncements emphasised transparency and constitutional propriety during government formation.
Recommendations and Reform Measures
- Justice Kurian Joseph Committee Report
- The Committee recommended incorporation of a new constitutional schedule governing discretionary powers of Governors.
- Codification may reduce ambiguity and ensure uniform constitutional practices across States.
- Need for Constitutional Neutrality
- Governors must exercise discretionary powers in a bona fide and impartial manner.
- Constitutional offices should remain insulated from partisan political considerations.
Way Forward
- Parliament should consider codifying objective guidelines for government formation in hung Assemblies.
- Floor tests should be conducted within a time-bound framework to ensure constitutional transparency.
- Governors should strictly adhere to recommendations of constitutional commissions and judicial precedents.
- Constitutional morality and federal principles should guide gubernatorial conduct during political uncertainty.
- Institutional reforms should strengthen the neutrality and credibility of the Governor’s office.
Conclusion
- The Governor’s role in government formation remains crucial for preserving constitutional stability and democratic legitimacy. Strengthening institutional neutrality and codifying conventions can improve federal trust and constitutional governance.
