Model Answer
0 min readIntroduction
The Governor of a State, a crucial link between the Union and the State governments, holds office during the 'pleasure' of the President of India, as stipulated under Article 163 of the Constitution. This provision has often been a subject of debate regarding the extent of presidential power and the potential for arbitrary action. Historically, the interpretation of 'pleasure' has evolved through judicial pronouncements, seeking to balance executive authority with constitutional principles of fairness and impartiality. The question necessitates an examination of this power, its limitations, and the safeguards in place to uphold the Governor's constitutional role.
Understanding the 'Pleasure of the President'
Article 163(1) states that a Governor holds office during the 'pleasure of the President'. This seemingly absolute power has been interpreted by the Supreme Court, significantly impacting its practical application. Initially, it was believed that the President could remove a Governor at any time, for any reason or no reason at all. However, subsequent judicial interventions have introduced a degree of reasonableness and fairness.
Evolution of Judicial Interpretation
The landmark case of Shankarrao Chavan v. State of Maharashtra (1990) significantly curtailed the President's absolute power. The Supreme Court held that the Governor is entitled to ‘reasons’ for their removal, even though those reasons need not be formally recorded. This implies that the removal cannot be arbitrary or whimsical. While not requiring a formal inquiry, the President must act based on objective material, ensuring fairness and preventing abuse of power. Further, the Mohd. Ahmed Khan v. Union of India (1998) case reinforced the principle that the Governor's office is a public office and therefore, principles of natural justice apply.
Limitations and Safeguards
- Article 163(2): Defines the functions of the Governor, including the power to appoint Ministers, and requires the advice of the Council of Ministers. This limits the Governor's discretion and mandates adherence to constitutional norms.
- Article 217: Deals with the transfer of a Governor from one State to another, requiring constitutional authority and preventing arbitrary deployment.
- Constitutional Conventions: Established practices and norms guide the President's actions. Frequent and unexplained removals would undermine the stability of the State government and erode public trust.
- Judicial Review: While limited, judicial review can be invoked if the removal appears manifestly arbitrary and violates constitutional principles.
Potential for Misuse and Concerns
Despite the judicial checks, the ‘pleasure of the President’ clause remains a point of concern. The potential for political manipulation exists, where Governors might be removed to serve partisan interests, especially during coalition governments or periods of political instability. This can undermine the federal structure and the autonomy of the States.
Case Study: Recent Instances of Governor Actions
Several recent instances have highlighted the contentious nature of the Governor's position. For example, the delayed assent to bills in some states, or the appointment of acting Chief Ministers, have raised questions about the Governor's impartiality and adherence to constitutional norms. These events underscore the importance of maintaining a delicate balance between executive authority and constitutional principles.
| Provision | Description |
|---|---|
| Article 163(1) | Governor holds office during the ‘pleasure’ of the President. |
| Article 163(2) | Defines the functions of the Governor and the need for Council of Ministers’ advice. |
| Article 217 | Deals with the transfer of Governors between States. |
Conclusion
In conclusion, while the Governor holds office during the 'pleasure' of the President, this power is not absolute. Judicial pronouncements have introduced the requirement of reasonable grounds for removal, preventing arbitrary action. Despite these safeguards, the potential for political manipulation remains a concern. Strengthening constitutional conventions, promoting transparency in decision-making, and ensuring judicial oversight are crucial to preserving the integrity and impartiality of the Governor's office, upholding the federal spirit of the Indian Constitution.
Answer Length
This is a comprehensive model answer for learning purposes and may exceed the word limit. In the exam, always adhere to the prescribed word count.