Governor - Impact on federalism

Published on 06 Jan 2025

Governor - Impact on federalism

Article 153 to 161 of the constitution creates the office of governor and mentions the powers of the Governor. Though the office has been established to act as an agent to instil cooperation between central government and state government, the office has created plenty of controversies rupturing the essence of Indian federalism.

• Appointment process: The governor is appointed by the President and holds the office at the pleasure of the President. The state government has no say in the appointment process and cannot pass a resolution for removing the governor from power.

• Discretionary power: The constitution grants certain discretionary powers to the governor which are often being overstepped leading to conflict with the state government.

• Example: In 2018, Karnataka governor misused his power by calling BJP to prove its majority by not considering the post poll alliance of the other major parties.

• Misuse of Article 356: The governor, in many instances, has called for the imposition of President's rule in politically motivated states.

• Example: The imposition of President's rule in Arunachal Pradesh in 2016 has been grave misuse of power with the court restoring the government to power.

• Delay in decision making: Governors can cause delay in the appointment of officers or can delay the passing of bills which can lead to political conflict with the state government.

• Example: Kerala Governor declining to administer oath has caused delay in appointment of Minister.

• Partisan role: The lack of independence of the governor makes them act in a partisan manner and this negatively affects the states which are ruled by parties which are opposing the ruling government at the centre.

• Example: The actions of Tamil Nadu governor like sitting over the anti-NEET bill and recent case of dismissing a minister have raised allegation from the state government that the governor is acting in a partisan manner

• Interference in state affairs: The governor might overstep their authority to interfere in the day to day administration of the state which creates conflict with the ruling government.

Way Forward

• Sarkaria commission recommendations

• Recommended the need to consult the chief minister in the appointment of governor.

• Punchhi commission recommendations 

• Appointment: 

• The person should be a person from outside the state

• He should not be a person intimately connected with local politics.

• Not involved too much in politics, especially in the recent past.

• Tenure: Governors should be given a fixed tenure of five years and not be removed at the will of the central government. (Punchhi commission)

• Removal: The procedure laid down for impeachment of the President can be also made applicable to the governor. (Punchhi commission)

• Discretionary power: The discretionary power under Article 163 should be limited and not used arbitrarily. (Punchhi commission).

  Judicial observation on the office of Governor Nabam Rebia case, 2016: Article 163 does not give the Governor a general discretionary power to act against the advice of his council of ministers and this power is limited. BP Singhal vs Union of India case, 2010: The court will presume that the President has a compelling and valid reason for the removal but if a sacked Governor comes to the court, the Centre will have to justify its decision.

Tags:
Polity

Keywords:
Governor Sarkaria commission Article 356 Punchhi commission Federalism

Syllabus:
General Studies Paper 2

Topics:
Indian Constitution