UPSC MainsGeneral Studies Paper IIIndian PolityPractice question

Discretionary Powers of the Governor and Federal Frictions

Concerns regarding the wide formulation and indiscreet application of discretionary powers of the governor need closer attention. Discuss.

Discuss~250 words2 min readmedium
Attempt it first, timed · optional

Write the answer on paper, as in the exam. Start the timer, keep to the word target.

00:00/ 11 min · 250 words

Done writing? Photograph the sheet and see how it scores against this model answer, with feedback on what to fix.

Upload your answer sheet

How to approach

Introduce the Governor's discretionary powers under Article 163(2) and contextualise recent federal disputes. Discuss key concerns stemming from the wide phrasing and partisan exercise of discretion across legislative and executive domains. Conclude with a way forward incorporating judicial precedents and commission recommendations to uphold cooperative federalism.

Model answer

323 words

Introduction

Article 163(2) of the Indian Constitution accords broad and subjective discretionary authority to the Governor, declaring their decisions final and beyond question. Recent federal frictions across multiple states highlight that the vague formulation and indiscreet exercise of this discretion risk subverting elected governments and impairing cooperative federalism.

Concerns Regarding the Indiscreet Application of Discretionary Powers

  • Legislative Stalling under Article 200: Exploiting the ambiguous timeline phrased as 'as soon as possible', Governors have indefinitely withheld assent or sat on bills passed by state legislatures. This functions as a de facto pocket veto, paralyzing lawmaking and undermining popular sovereignty.
  • Partisan Political Interventions: The arbitrary use of situational discretion during hung assemblies—such as biased sequencing in inviting leaders to form governments or abrupt directives for floor tests—disrupts legislative stability and compromises gubernatorial neutrality.
  • Misuse of Article 356: Subjective gubernatorial reports alleging a breakdown of constitutional machinery have historically facilitated politically motivated imposition of President's Rule, bypassing democratic accountability.
  • Structural Vulnerability and Bias: Under Article 156, Governors serve strictly during the 'pleasure of the President'. Without security of tenure, incumbents are structurally incentivized to act as agents of the Union government rather than impartial constitutional umpires.

Way Forward

  • Enforce Supreme Court Mandates: Implement the ruling in State of Punjab v. Principal Secretary (2023), which affirmed that Governors cannot sit indefinitely on bills and must return non-money bills promptly if assent is withheld.
  • Ensure Security of Tenure: Adopt the Punchhi Commission's recommendation to provide a fixed five-year tenure and an impeachment procedure analogous to that of the President, reducing central political leverage.
  • Codify Discretionary Conventions: Institutionalize the Sarkaria Commission guidelines regarding the order of preference for government formation in hung assemblies to curb arbitrary situational decisions.

Conclusion

Gubernatorial discretion was intended by the framers as a rare exception circumscribed by constitutional morality, as underscored in the Nabam Rebia ruling. Institutionalizing clear procedural boundaries and respecting judicial limits will restore the Governor's office as an authentic linchpin of cooperative federalism.

Key facts to remember

case study
State of Punjab v. Principal Secretary (2023)

The Supreme Court held that the Governor cannot sit indefinitely on bills passed by the legislature under Article 200, ruling that such inaction subverts parliamentary democracy and requires prompt remittance to the assembly.

case study
B.P. Singhal v. Union of India (2010)

A Constitution Bench held that while the President can remove a Governor without showing cause, the power cannot be exercised arbitrarily, capriciously, or based on political changes at the Union level.

scheme
Punchhi Commission Recommendations (2010)

Recommended constitutional amendments to grant Governors a guaranteed five-year term and provide for removal through state assembly impeachment, mitigating central political influence.

Frequently asked questions

Can a Governor indefinitely sit on a bill passed by a state legislature?

No. The Supreme Court in 2023 clarified that under the first proviso to Article 200, Governors must return bills 'as soon as possible' if assent is withheld, prohibiting an unconstitutional pocket veto.