Tussle Between Governors and State Governments

Table of Contents

Context: A fresh dispute between the governor and the state government has arisen in Tamil Nadu following the governor’s controversial dismissal of a minister.

Dismissal of a Minister or Council of Ministers

Constitutional provisions:
- Article 164(1) provides that the chief Minister shall be appointed by the Governor and the other Ministers shall be appointed by the Governor on the advice of the Chief Minister, and the Ministers shall hold office during the pleasure of the Governor.
- Though Ministers hold office during the pleasure of governor, but governor is bound to exercise his pleasure in accordance with the Chief Minister’s advice. Thus, it is a power of the Chief Minister against his colleagues.
Judicial pronouncements in this regard:
- Shamsher Singh & Anr vs State of Punjab (1974): A seven-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court held that the President and the Governor should exercise their formal constitutional powers only upon and in accordance with the advice of their Ministers save in a few well-known exceptional situations.
- Nabam Rebia and Etc. vs Deputy Speaker and Ors (2016): The Supreme Court cited the observations of Dr. B R Ambedkar: “The Governor under the Constitution has no function which he can discharge by himself; no functions at all. While he has no functions, he has certain duties to perform, and I think the House will do well to bear in mind this distinction.”
So, what does the “pleasure” of the Governor mean?
- The Governor can have his pleasure as long as the government enjoys majority in the House.
- The Governor can withdraw his pleasure only when the government loses majority but refuses to quit. Then he withdraws the pleasure and dismisses it.

About the Office of Governor

About Governor	Governor is a nominal executive head of the state. He forms an important part of the state executive where he acts as the chief executive head.
Envisaged role of governor	Vital link: Between the center and the states. Maintenance of national interests, integrity and internal security advocates central supervision for which the governor is required. Responsible government: For increasing responsible government in the states. Smooth functioning: Crucial in smooth functioning of democracy. Check arbitrariness: Governor is to check arbitrariness of the state government.
Appointment of governor	The Governor is neither directly elected by the people nor indirectly elected by a specially constituted electoral college as is the case with the President. He/she is appointed by the President of India by warrant under his hand and seal (Article 155). While drafting the Constitution, the Canadian model of Governor’ appointment by the Centre was accepted in the Constituent Assembly.
Qualifications	The Constitution lays down only two qualifications for the appointment of a person as a governor. He/she should be a citizen of India. He/she should have completed the age of 35 years. Additionally, two conventions have also developed in this regard over the years. He/she should be an outsider, meaning not belonging to the State of appointment so as to remain free from the local politics. While appointing the Governor, the President is required to consult the Chief Minister of the State concerned, so that the smooth functioning of the constitutional machinery is ensured.
Tenure/Removal of Governor	Article 156 states that: The governor holds for a term of 5 years from the date on which he joins his office and he/she continues to hold his office until his successor joins the office, even after his expiration of his term. The governor is supposed to hold office during the pleasure of the President. If this pleasure is withdrawn before completion of the five-year term, the Governor has to step down. The governor can resign to his office by writing to the President of India. However, the Constitution does not specify any reasons for the President to remove a governor. As the President works on the aid and advice of the Prime Minister and the council of ministers, in effect, the Governor can be appointed and removed by the central government. Since the Governor holds office “on the pleasure of the President”, questions have been raised time and again on whether the Governor has any security of tenure, and if the President is obligated to show reasons for recalling a Governor.

Concerns related to the office of Governor

Appointment/removal process: Governors hold office till the pleasure of the president as no grounds for removal is mentioned in the constitution.
- This leads to favoritism in the appointment process and well-suited candidates are ignored in favor of the less competent individuals.
Acting as an agent of a political party at the centre: Due to favoritism in the appointment and lack of any security of tenure in the constitution, the office of governor often works as a puppet/agent of the union government instead of acting as a bridge between state and centre government.
Misuse of discretionary powers:
- Hung assemblies: It is a situational discretion where s/he is free to invite a party/alliance to form the government in case no single party/pre-poll alliance has won the majority of the seats in the state assembly elections.
- Reserving a bill for the president’s consideration: It is his constitutional discretion to reserve certain state bills for the consideration of the president.
Misuse of the emergency powers: Governors have often found to be recommending imposition of the president’s rule in the state on frivolous grounds, especially when the ruling party at centre is different from that of the concerned state.
Bypassing the elected government: There have been instances when governors found to give orders to state officials directly or visit public offices without informing the state governments. This is against his/her constitutional mandate as he is only a nominal head and expected to act on the advice of the COM in the state.

Recommendations by various committees

The Sarkaria Commission, 1983: It proposed that the Vice President of India and Speaker of Lok Sabha should be consulted by the Prime Minister in the selection of Governors.
The National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution, 2000: The Commission suggested that the “Governor of a State should be appointed by the President, after consultation with the Chief Minister of that State.
The Justice Madan Mohan Punchhi Committee, 2007:
- It recommended that that a committee comprising the Prime Minister, Home Minister, Vice President, Speaker, and the concerned Chief Minister should choose the Governor.
- The Punchhi Committee recommended deleting the “Doctrine of Pleasure” from the Constitution but backed the right of the Governor to sanction the prosecution of ministers against the advice of the state government.
- It also argued for a provision for impeachment of the Governor by the state legislature.