Mains Marathon

Approach :

• Briefly introduce the constitutional role of the Governor.
• Critically examine the role of the Governor amidst recent developments.
• Suggest a way forward.
• Conclude with a scholarly remark.

Introduction :

The Governor, under Articles 153 to 162 of the Indian Constitution, was envisaged as a non-partisan constitutional head of the state, meant to act as a sentinel of the Constitution and a link between the Centre and the States. However, over the years, the office has increasingly been seen as an instrument of the Union government, raising concerns about its impact on India’s cooperative federalism.

Body 

Constitutional Role of the Governor

• Executive Head of the State: Functions based on the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers [Article 163].
• Discretionary Powers: Includes situations such as government formation in a hung assembly, reserving bills for the President, and recommending President’s Rule under Article 356.
• Assent to Bills: May grant, withhold, or reserve state bills for Presidential consideration.
• Emergency Responsibilities: Reports to the President in cases of constitutional breakdown in the state.

Recent Developments and Political Controversies

Few instances reflect a perceived shift from constitutional neutrality to political activism, often in favor of the ruling party at the Centre.

• Maharashtra (2019): The Governor’s decision to swear in a government at dawn without proper floor testing procedures led to allegations of political manipulation.
• Manipur (2017) & Goa (2017): Governors invited parties with fewer seats to form governments, bypassing the single-largest parties.
• Tamil Nadu: Delay in giving assent to the anti-NEET bill and making public comments critical of the elected government raised serious concerns.
• Kerala: Withholding assent to multiple bills passed by the assembly, including the Kerala University Amendment Bill, despite repeated cabinet requests.
• Punjab and West Bengal: Tensions between the Governor and state governments over appointments and central directives have strained Centre–State relations.

Implications for Centre–State Relations

• Erosion of Federal Trust: Politically motivated actions by Governors damage the spirit of cooperative federalism.
• Legislative Deadlocks: Withholding assent to bills disrupts legislative processes and policy implementation at the state level.
• Undermining Elected Governments: Discretionary powers, when misused, tend to undermine the authority of elected state governments, violating the democratic mandate.

Recommendations for Reform

• Sarkaria Commission (1988): Recommended appointing Governors from outside the state, with no active political affiliations, and consulting the Chief Minister during appointments.
• Punchhi Commission (2010): Suggested clear guidelines on the use of discretionary powers and limiting the role of Governors in recommending President’s Rule.
• Supreme Court Judgments: In S.R. Bommai v. Union of India (1994), the Court laid down safeguards against misuse of Article 356, asserting the Governor's actions must be legally and constitutionally sound.

Conclusion 

As the Sarkaria Commission (1988) asserted:

“The Governor’s role is to be that of a neutral constitutional head and not to be perceived as an instrument of the Union government.”

Only by embodying this principle can the Governor truly serve as the guardian of the Constitution, preserving both the autonomy of states and the integrity of the Union.