Governor’s Role in Government Formation

The recent political developments in Tamil Nadu following the Assembly elections have once again brought national attention to the constitutional role

Governor’s Role in Government Formation

The recent political developments in Tamil Nadu following the Assembly elections have once again brought national attention to the constitutional role of the Governor in government formation during a hung Assembly. After Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK) secured 108 seats and later staked claim to form the government with support from 120 MLAs, debates emerged regarding the Governor’s discretionary powers under the Constitution of India.

The issue has revived discussions on constitutional morality, neutrality of Governors, floor tests, and the recommendations of expert commissions such as the Sarkaria Commission and Punchhi Commission.

What is Government Formation in a Hung Assembly?

A hung Assembly occurs when:

• No single political party secures an absolute majority
• Multiple parties attempt to form alliances
• The Governor must decide whom to invite to form the government

In such situations, the Governor plays a critical constitutional role in ensuring that a stable government is formed according to constitutional principles.

The recent Tamil Nadu political developments became an important example of how constitutional conventions operate in practice.

What Does Article 164(1) of the Constitution Say?

Article 164(1) of the Constitution of India states that:

• The Chief Minister shall be appointed by the Governor
• Other ministers shall be appointed on the advice of the Chief Minister

In normal situations where a party wins a clear majority, the Governor simply invites the leader of that party to form the government.

However, constitutional complications arise when:

• No party gets majority
• Alliances are formed after elections
• Competing claims are made

In such cases, the Constitution grants discretionary powers to the Governor.

Governor’s Discretionary Powers

The Governor is generally considered the nominal constitutional head of the State executive. However, in certain exceptional situations, discretionary powers can be exercised.

One such important situation is:

• Appointment of the Chief Minister in a hung Assembly

The Governor must determine which leader is most likely to command majority support in the Assembly.

The discretion is meant to ensure:

• Stable governance
• Constitutional functioning
• Majority-backed government

Sarkaria Commission Recommendations

The Sarkaria Commission (1987) laid down important recommendations regarding government formation in a hung Assembly.

According to the Commission, the order of preference should be:

First Preference

• A pre-poll alliance commanding majority

Second Preference

• The single largest party with support from others

Third Preference

• A post-poll coalition where all partners join government

Fourth Preference

• A post-poll alliance with outside support

These recommendations aimed to reduce arbitrary decision-making by Governors.

Punchhi Commission Recommendations

The Punchhi Commission (2010) largely supported the Sarkaria Commission principles.

It emphasized that Governors must:

• Remain politically neutral
• Avoid partisan behaviour
• Follow constitutional conventions carefully

The Commission stressed that the Governor’s office should function impartially rather than politically.

Tamil Nadu Government Formation 2026

In the recent Tamil Nadu Assembly elections:

• TVK secured 108 seats
• Majority mark in Assembly was 118
• TVK later submitted support letters from 120 MLAs

Governor discussions reportedly focused on verifying whether the post-poll alliance actually enjoyed majority support.

Eventually, TVK chief C. Joseph Vijay was sworn in as Chief Minister.

The episode again highlighted debates around:

• Governor’s discretion
• Post-poll alliances
• Floor test requirements

Problems and Controversies Related to Governor’s Role

Over the years, multiple controversies have arisen regarding Governors inviting parties to form governments.

Critics argue that Governors sometimes deviate from established conventions.

Goa and Manipur (2017)

After elections in:

• Goa
• Manipur

the Governors invited BJP-led alliances to form governments even though Congress emerged as the single largest party.

Both governments later proved majority on the floor of the House.

Karnataka Crisis (2018)

In Karnataka:

• BJP was invited as single largest party
• Congress-JD(S) alliance also claimed majority

The Governor invited BJP first despite the post-poll alliance claim.

The issue became politically controversial and eventually reached the Supreme Court.

Maharashtra Political Crisis (2019)

The Maharashtra government formation controversy became one of the most debated constitutional events in recent years.

The Governor appointed a BJP-led coalition amid uncertainty regarding majority support.

Eventually:

• Political realignments occurred
• Floor-test concerns emerged
• The Chief Minister resigned

The episode intensified debates over constitutional morality and gubernatorial discretion.

Why the Governor’s Role Becomes Controversial

Several concerns are frequently raised regarding the Governor’s office:

Allegations of Political Bias

Critics often accuse Governors of acting in favour of the Union Government.

Lack of Clear Constitutional Rules

The Constitution does not provide detailed procedures for selecting the Chief Minister in a hung Assembly.

Different Interpretations

Different Governors have followed different standards in similar situations.

Delay in Floor Tests

Political instability sometimes increases when floor tests are delayed.

Importance of Floor Test

The Supreme Court has repeatedly emphasized that:

• Majority must be tested on the floor of the House

and not merely through:

• Letters of support
• Raj Bhavan claims
• Media statements

S.R. Bommai v. Union of India (1994)

The landmark judgment in S.R. Bommai v. Union of India established an important constitutional principle:

The floor of the House is the proper forum to determine majority support.

This judgment significantly limited arbitrary dismissal of governments and strengthened parliamentary democracy.

Rameshwar Prasad Case (2006)

The Supreme Court reiterated similar principles in the Rameshwar Prasad case.

The Court again emphasized:

• Constitutional morality
• Floor-test requirement
• Democratic legitimacy

Why Floor Test is Important

A floor test ensures:

• Transparency
• Democratic legitimacy
• Prevention of manipulation
• Stable government formation

It also prevents prolonged constitutional uncertainty.

Debate on Majority Requirement

The Tamil Nadu developments also triggered debate regarding the meaning of majority.

The majority mark of 118 is based on:

• Full Assembly strength of 234

However, constitutionally:

• Majority is determined by members present and voting

This means abstentions can alter the effective majority requirement.

Justice Kurian Joseph Committee Recommendation

The Justice Kurian Joseph Committee on Union-State relations recommended adding a new constitutional schedule to codify rules regarding Governor’s discretionary powers.

The proposal aimed to:

• Reduce ambiguity
• Prevent misuse of discretion
• Establish uniform constitutional standards

Many constitutional experts believe codification could improve consistency.

Need for Constitutional Neutrality

Constitutional experts repeatedly stress that Governors must function as:

• Neutral constitutional authorities
• Protectors of democratic values
• Guardians of constitutional morality

The office is not expected to function as a political institution.

What is Constitutional Morality?

Constitutional morality refers to:

• Respect for democratic principles
• Adherence to constitutional values
• Fair exercise of constitutional powers

Governors are expected to uphold constitutional morality while exercising discretion.

Challenges in Coalition Politics

Coalition politics has increased the complexity of government formation.

Modern political realities include:

• Multi-party systems
• Regional parties
• Post-poll alliances
• Independent MLAs

These situations often require Governors to make difficult constitutional decisions.

Importance of Impartial Governance

An impartial Governor helps ensure:

• Political stability
• Public confidence
• Democratic legitimacy
• Constitutional balance

Perceived bias can damage trust in constitutional institutions.

Possible Reforms

Several reforms have been suggested over the years.

Codification of Rules

Clear constitutional guidelines for government formation.

Mandatory Time-Bound Floor Test

Quick floor tests to avoid uncertainty.

Judicial Review Standards

Faster constitutional review by courts.

Stronger Constitutional Conventions

Uniform adherence to Sarkaria and Punchhi recommendations.

Conclusion

The recent Tamil Nadu political developments once again highlighted the importance of the Governor’s role in government formation during a hung Assembly. While Article 164(1) grants discretionary powers to the Governor, constitutional commissions and Supreme Court judgments have consistently emphasized neutrality, constitutional morality, and floor tests as the proper basis for determining majority support.

The recommendations of the Sarkaria Commission, Punchhi Commission, and the principles laid down in S.R. Bommai v. Union of India continue to guide constitutional interpretation in such situations. As coalition politics becomes more common in India, debates over gubernatorial discretion and democratic accountability are likely to remain highly relevant in Indian constitutional law.