Governor — Discretionary Powers, Role & Controversies

Constitutional Position of the Governor

The Governor is the constitutional head of a state, as provided under Article 153 of the Constitution. Each state shall have a Governor, though a single person can be appointed Governor of two or more states (Article 153, proviso added by 7th Amendment 1956).

The Governor is appointed by the President under his hand and seal (Article 155) and holds office during the pleasure of the President (Article 156). The normal term is five years, but no security of tenure is constitutionally guaranteed.

Key Articles (Part VI: Articles 153–167)

Article 163 — Aid and Advice vs Discretion

Article 163(1): There shall be a Council of Ministers with the Chief Minister at the head to aid and advise the Governor in the exercise of his functions, except in so far as he is by or under this Constitution required to exercise his functions or any of them in his discretion.

Article 163(2): If any question arises whether any matter is or is not a matter as respects which the Governor is by or under this Constitution required to act in his discretion, the decision of the Governor in his discretion shall be final, and the validity of anything done by the Governor shall not be called in question on the ground that he ought or ought not to have acted in his discretion.

Article 163(3): The question whether any, and if so what, advice was tendered by Ministers to the Governor shall not be inquired into in any court.

Nature of Discretionary Powers

The Governor's discretionary powers are of two types:

Constitutional Discretion — explicitly provided by the Constitution:

• Reservation of a bill for President's consideration (Article 200)
• Recommending President's Rule (Article 356)
• Seeking information from Chief Minister (Article 167)
• Dissolving the state assembly in certain situations
• Appointing Chief Minister when no party has a clear majority

Situational Discretion — arising from political circumstances:

• Determining which party leader should be invited to form government after a hung assembly
• Ordering a floor test
• Deciding the time allowed to form a government

Power Over Bills: Articles 200 & 201

Under Article 200, when a Bill is passed by the state legislature, the Governor may:

1. Give assent to the bill
2. Withhold assent (effectively a veto — but sends it back to the legislature for reconsideration)
3. Reserve the bill for the President's consideration
4. In the case of a money bill, he can only give or withhold assent — he cannot return it

If the legislature passes the bill again (with or without amendments), the Governor must give assent — he cannot withhold assent a second time. This means the Governor has only a suspensive veto, not an absolute veto.

Under Article 201, when a bill is reserved for the President, the President may:

• Give assent
• Withhold assent
• Direct the Governor to return the bill to the legislature for reconsideration

Key rule: There is no constitutional time limit under Article 200 for the Governor to act on a bill — a gap exploited to create "pocket vetoes" until the Supreme Court intervened.

Swearing-in & Floor Test Controversies

A politically charged discretionary situation arises when the Governor must decide:

• Who to invite to form the government after a hung assembly result
• Whether to order a floor test before or after swearing in

The Governor's actions in these situations have been controversial in multiple states. The general constitutional convention — reinforced by Supreme Court rulings — is:

• The largest party/pre-poll alliance with a reasonable claim must be invited first
• The floor test must be held promptly — within a short period (days, not weeks)
• The Governor cannot favour any political party or delay the process

Landmark Supreme Court Cases

1. Nabam Rebia & Bamang Felix v. Deputy Speaker (2016) — Arunachal Pradesh

A five-judge Constitution Bench (Justices J.S. Khehar, Dipak Misra, M.B. Lokur, P.C. Ghose and N.V. Ramana) delivered this landmark ruling on 13 July 2016.

Background: The Arunachal Pradesh Governor summoned an early assembly session (advancing the date by a month) without consulting the Chief Minister, causing a political crisis. President's Rule was subsequently imposed.

Ruling:

• The Governor's power to summon the House under Article 174 must be exercised on the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers, not at his own discretion
• The Governor cannot unilaterally summon, prorogue, or advance the date of a legislative session
• The Governor's discretion does not extend to the exercise of powers under Article 174
• President's Rule in Arunachal Pradesh was set aside and the Congress government was restored

Significance: Established that the Governor's discretionary powers are narrowly defined and cannot be used to destabilise elected governments.

2. Uttarakhand Floor Test Case (Harish Rawat v. Union of India, 2016)

The Supreme Court directed that a floor test be conducted in the Uttarakhand assembly, reinforcing that the Governor cannot recommend President's Rule without allowing the government to demonstrate its majority on the floor of the House.

3. State of Tamil Nadu v. Governor of Tamil Nadu (2025)

Judgment date: 8 April 2025 (reported in search results above)

Background: The Tamil Nadu Government approached the Supreme Court in October 2023 challenging Governor R.N. Ravi's inaction on 12 Bills passed between January 2020 and April 2023.

Supreme Court's ruling:

• There is no concept of "pocket veto" or "absolute veto" under Article 200
• The Governor has only three options — give assent, return the bill, or reserve for President
• The Governor cannot indefinitely sit on bills without acting
• Exercising powers under Article 142, the Supreme Court declared the 12 pending bills as deemed to have received assent — an extraordinary constitutional remedy

Significance: The most decisive SC ruling on the Governor's role in the legislative process, firmly closing the "pocket veto" loophole.

Sarkaria Commission (1983) Recommendations

The Sarkaria Commission was constituted in June 1983 by the Government of India under Justice R.S. Sarkaria. It submitted its report in 1988 containing 247 recommendations on Centre-State relations.

On Governor's appointment:

• Governor should be appointed by a committee comprising the Prime Minister, Home Minister, Speaker of Lok Sabha, and Chief Minister of the concerned state
• The person should be from outside the state
• Must be a person who has not taken an active part in politics recently
• Should not be a member of the ruling party at the Centre

On Governor's powers:

• Discretionary powers should be exercised sparingly and only in exceptional circumstances
• Governor should not have a role in day-to-day administration
• In appointing CM, the Governor should first invite the leader of the largest party/alliance in the assembly

Punchhi Commission (2010) Recommendations

The Punchhi Commission on Centre-State Relations was constituted in April 2007 under Justice M.M. Punchhi, former Chief Justice of India. It submitted its seven-volume report in March 2010 with 273 recommendations.

On Governor's tenure and removal:

• Governor should be given a fixed tenure of five years — he should not be removed arbitrarily before the expiry of tenure
• Removal should be through a process of impeachment by the State Legislature (similar to the President's impeachment)
• The practice of treating Governors as "political football" must stop

On discretionary powers:

• The Governor should give his decision on a Bill within six months of its receipt — the commission recommended prescribing a time limit
• The appointment process should be made more transparent and consultative

Key criticism: The Punchhi Commission noted that Governors were frequently changed when a new government came to power at the Centre, undermining the office's neutrality.

Summary: Governor's Discretionary Powers at a Glance

Previous Year Questions (PYQs)

Prelims

1. (2020) Consider the following statements: (1) No law made by Parliament for conferring powers and functions upon the Governor shall be void on the ground that it was not reserved for the consideration of the President. (2) The Governor of a state can reserve a money bill for the consideration of the President. Which of the statements given above is/are correct? — (b) 2 only

2. (2016) The question of disqualification of members of Parliament on the grounds of defection is decided by: — (Speaker/Chairman) — A different question that year, but in the same paper, the role of Governor in the legislative process under Article 200 was tested.

3. (2013) A money bill in the Indian Parliament can be introduced only with the recommendation of the — (President). (Tests knowledge of Article 117 and contrasts with state-level Article 207 — Governor's role.)

Mains

1. (GS2, 2022) "The Governor is the agent of the Centre." Do you agree with this statement? How does the role of the Governor create difficulties for Centre-State relations? Discuss with examples.

2. (GS2, 2016) The exercise of discretionary power of Governor is a grey area in the functioning of constitutional government in India. Analyse with examples.

3. (GS2, 2014) The power of the Governor to withhold assent to a bill passed by the State Legislature has no constitutional limit. Comment.

Exam Strategy

High-value topic for GS2 Mains. Questions typically ask you to analyse the Governor's role in Centre-State relations, evaluate discretionary power controversies, or discuss commission recommendations.

Key points to always mention:

• The dual nature of the Governor — constitutional head but also agent of the Centre (Sarkaria Commission view)
• Nabam Rebia (2016) — Governor's power over assembly sessions is not discretionary
• TN Governor (2025) — no pocket veto; bills deemed assented by SC under Article 142
• Sarkaria — transparent appointment via PM, HM, Speaker, and CM; non-political person
• Punchhi — fixed 5-year tenure; removal by state legislature impeachment

Do not confuse:

• Article 161 (Governor's pardon) vs Article 72 (President's pardon — can pardon death sentences, Governor cannot)
• Article 200 (state bills) vs Article 111 (Union bills — President's assent)
• Sarkaria Commission (1983, report 1988) vs Punchhi Commission (set up 2007, report 2010)

Mains answer structure:

1. Constitutional position briefly
2. Nature of discretionary powers — with Article 163 analysis
3. Key controversies — floor test, bill withholding
4. SC case law (Nabam Rebia + TN Governor)
5. Commission recommendations
6. Way forward — need for depoliticisation of the office