Syllabus: Functions and responsibilities of the Union and the States, issues and challenges pertaining to the federal structure.
Context and Background
- Repeated controversies have emerged over Governors’ addresses in Opposition-ruled State legislatures.
- The disputes raise questions about constitutional propriety and federal balance.
- Historical practice links the address to the policy agenda of elected councils of ministers.
Historical Evolution of the Address
- Section 63, Government of India Act, 1935, allowed Governors discretionary legislative addresses.
- From 1937 provincial autonomy, speeches reflected ministerial policy, not personal Governor views.
- Constituent Assembly adopted this understanding for post-Independence constitutional practice.
Constitutional Provisions: Articles 175 and 176
- Article 175 permits the Governor to address legislature, but does not mandate such addresses.
- Article 176 mandates an annual address at the year’s first session.
- The address must be prepared by the Council of Ministers, outlining achievements and policy roadmap.
- It enables legislative debate through a Motion of Thanks under House procedural rules.
Judicial Interpretation and Constitutional Head Role
- Shamsher Singh v. State of Punjab (1974) affirmed Governor acts on ministerial advice.
- Nabam Rebia v. Deputy Speaker (2016) reiterated advice-based performance under Articles 175 and 176.
- The Governor functions as a constitutional head, not an independent political authority.
Contemporary Issues in State Practices
- Tamil Nadu Governor omitted speech portions in 2022–23 and skipped addresses since 2024.
- Kerala Governor excluded cabinet-cleared sections from the policy address.
- Karnataka Governor delivered a two-line personal address, departing from official text.
- Such actions conflict with Article 159 oath to preserve and defend the Constitution.
Federalism, Politicisation, and Reform Proposals
- The Governor is a nominal executive head and appointee of the Centre.
- Conflicts highlight politicisation of the gubernatorial office and federal tensions.
- Sarkaria and Punchhi Commissions recommended consulting Chief Ministers before appointments.
- Consultation could reduce discord and preserve customary legislative conventions.
Conclusion
- Respecting constitutional conventions is essential for legislative accountability and federal harmony.
- Balanced reforms can safeguard State autonomy without undermining national unity.