State Executive and Governors Role

The Constitution of India mirrors the parliamentary system of the Centre in the states, establishing a similar framework of governance. Part VI outlines the structure and functioning of state governments, with Articles 153 to 167 specifically addressing the state executive. This executive comprises the governor, the chief minister, the council of ministers, and the advocate general. Notably, unlike the Centre, there is no provision for a vice-governor akin to the Vice-President.

At the heart of the state executive is the governor, who serves as the chief executive head of the state. However, much like the President at the national level, the governor functions as a nominal or titular head, exercising powers on the advice of the council of ministers. Simultaneously, the governor acts as an agent of the central government, embodying a dual role that balances state autonomy with national oversight.

While each state typically has its own governor, the 7th Constitutional Amendment Act, 1956, introduced flexibility by allowing the same individual to serve as governor for two or more states. This provision has enabled efficient administration across state boundaries when needed.

Appointment of the Governor

Unlike the President, who is indirectly elected by an electoral college, the Governor of a state is neither directly chosen by the people nor selected through any electoral process. Instead, the President appoints the Governor by warrant under his hand and seal, making the Governor, in essence, a nominee of the Central government. However, the Supreme Court clarified in 1979 that this role is not mere employment under the Centre. It constitutes an independent constitutional office, free from the control or subordination of the Union government.

The framers of the Constitution initially considered direct election of the Governor through universal adult suffrage, as proposed in the Draft Constitution. Ultimately, the Constituent Assembly rejected this in favor of presidential appointment, citing several compelling reasons. Direct election, they argued, would clash with the parliamentary system in states, where the Governor serves as a nominal head akin to the President at the Centre. It risked fostering conflicts between the Governor and the Chief Minister, while also incurring unnecessary expense on elaborate elections for a ceremonial position. Moreover, such polls could devolve into personality-driven contests, drawing in vast numbers of voters on non-substantive issues and undermining national unity by encouraging separatist tendencies or party affiliations that compromise the Governor's neutrality. An elected Governor, likely tied to a political party, might prioritize state interests over impartiality, and could complicate leadership during state assembly elections—potentially elevating second-tier ruling party figures at the Chief Minister's behest. Presidential nomination, by contrast, allowed the Centre to safeguard its oversight of states while ensuring stability.

This choice drew inspiration from the Canadian model, where provincial Lieutenant Governors are appointed by the Governor-General (representing the Centre), rather than the American system of direct gubernatorial elections.

The Constitution specifies just two formal qualifications for the post: the appointee must be a citizen of India and at least 35 years old. Over time, two key conventions have emerged to bolster the office's effectiveness. First, Governors are typically "outsiders"—not residents of the state they serve—to insulate them from local political pressures. Second, the President consults the state's Chief Minister before appointment, promoting harmonious constitutional functioning. Though these practices have occasionally been disregarded, they underscore the delicate balance between Centre-state relations.

Conditions of the Governor’s Office

The Indian Constitution establishes clear conditions for the Governor's office to safeguard its independence and impartiality. A Governor cannot be a member of either House of Parliament or a state legislature; if appointed from such a position, they are deemed to have vacated that seat upon assuming office. Similarly, the Governor must not hold any other office of profit. These restrictions prevent conflicts of interest and underscore the role's non-partisan nature.

In terms of perks and compensation, the Governor enjoys the use of the official residence, Raj Bhavan, rent-free. Emoluments, allowances, and privileges are set by Parliament and remain fixed during the term, ensuring financial security. If one person serves as Governor for multiple states, the President determines how the states share these expenses proportionally. Notably, in 2018, Parliament raised the Governor's monthly salary from â‚ą1.10 lakh to â‚ą3.50 lakh, reflecting adjustments to contemporary standards.

Like the President, the Governor benefits from extensive privileges and immunities. Official acts grant personal immunity from legal proceedings, while the term of office shields against criminal actions—even for personal conduct—along with protection from arrest or imprisonment. Civil proceedings for personal acts are possible only after two months' notice, striking a balance between accountability and dignity.

Before taking office, the Governor must swear an oath or affirmation, pledging to faithfully execute duties, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution and laws, and devote themselves to the service and well-being of the state's people. This oath is administered by the Chief Justice of the relevant High Court, or the senior-most available judge in their absence. The same oath applies to anyone temporarily discharging the Governor's functions.

Term of the Governor’s Office

A Governor serves a term of five years, calculated from the date they assume office. This tenure, however, remains subject to the pleasure of the President, meaning it can end at the President's discretion. A Governor may also resign at any time by submitting a letter to the President.

The Supreme Court has clarified that this "pleasure" doctrine is not open to judicial review, underscoring the Governor's lack of fixed tenure or security of office. The President can remove a Governor without assigning any specific grounds—a flexibility rooted in the Constitution's silence on removal criteria. This power has been exercised notably in political transitions: in 1989, the National Front government under V.P. Singh asked all Governors appointed by the previous Congress regime to resign, leading to some replacements and others retained. The pattern repeated in 1991, when the Congress government led by P.V. Narasimha Rao replaced fourteen Governors from the V.P. Singh and Chandra Shekhar eras.

The President also holds authority to transfer a Governor from one state to another for the remainder of their term, or to reappoint a Governor whose five-year tenure has ended, either in the same state or elsewhere. To ensure continuity, a Governor can continue in office beyond the five-year mark until their successor takes charge, preventing any governance vacuum.

In unforeseen contingencies not covered by the Constitution—such as the death or incapacity of a sitting Governor—the President may make suitable arrangements for discharging the Governor's functions. Typically, this involves appointing the Chief Justice of the state's High Court to serve temporarily in an acting capacity.

Governors Executive, Legislative, Financial, Judicial Powers

The Governor of an Indian state exercises executive, legislative, financial, and judicial powers that closely parallel those of the President of India. Notably absent, however, are the President's diplomatic, military, and emergency powers, reflecting the Governor's more circumscribed role as a state-level executive.

For a structured understanding, the Governor's powers and functions are best examined under four primary categories: executive, legislative, financial, and judicial.

Executive Powers of the Governor

In the Indian constitutional framework, the Governor serves as the formal head of the state executive, embodying its authority in all official actions. Every executive decision and operation of the state government is carried out in the Governor's name, underscoring their ceremonial yet pivotal role. To ensure smooth governance, the Governor holds the power to frame rules for authenticating orders and instruments issued in their name. Additionally, they can issue regulations to facilitate the efficient conduct of state government business and to allocate responsibilities among ministers, promoting orderly administration.

A key aspect of the Governor's executive authority lies in their appointment powers. They appoint the Chief Minister—typically the leader of the majority party or coalition in the state assembly—and, on the Chief Minister's advice, other ministers, all of whom hold office during the Governor's pleasure. In states like Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh, and Odisha, the Governor must appoint a dedicated Tribal Welfare Minister, though the 94th Constitutional Amendment Act, 2006, exempted Bihar from this requirement. The Governor also appoints the Advocate General, setting their remuneration, with the officeholder serving at the Governor's discretion. Similarly, they appoint the State Election Commissioner, determining the terms of service and tenure, but removal can occur only through the same rigorous process as for a High Court judge. The Chairman and members of the State Public Service Commission are likewise appointed by the Governor, though only the President can remove them. As Chancellor of state universities, the Governor further appoints vice-chancellors, blending executive oversight with educational administration.

Beyond appointments, the Governor maintains active oversight of the state executive. They can request any information on administrative matters or legislative proposals directly from the Chief Minister. If a minister takes a decision without prior consideration by the Council of Ministers, the Governor may direct the Chief Minister to place the issue before the full Council for deliberation, ensuring collective responsibility.

In times of crisis, the Governor's role expands significantly. They can recommend to the President the imposition of President's Rule under Article 356, triggering a constitutional emergency. During such periods, the Governor acts as the President's agent, wielding extensive executive powers to administer the state on behalf of the Centre. This mechanism highlights the Governor's position as a vital link between state and Union executives, balancing autonomy with national oversight.

Legislative Powers of the Governor

The Governor serves as an integral component of the state legislature, wielding a range of significant powers that ensure its smooth functioning and oversight. Foremost among these is the authority to summon or prorogue the state legislature and to dissolve the State Legislative Assembly. This power allows the Governor to control the legislative calendar, convening sessions as needed or ending them at appropriate times. Additionally, the Governor addresses the state legislature at the start of the first session following each general election and the opening session of every year, setting the tone for legislative priorities. The Governor may also send messages to one or both houses regarding any pending bill or other matters of importance, prompting discussion or action.

In moments of procedural exigency, the Governor steps in to maintain continuity. For instance, if both the Speaker and Deputy Speaker of the State Legislative Assembly vacate their offices, the Governor appoints another member to preside over proceedings. A parallel provision applies to the State Legislative Council, where the Governor appoints a member to chair sessions if both the Chairman and Deputy Chairman are absent. Beyond these interim roles, the Governor contributes to the composition of the upper house by nominating one-sixth of its members—individuals with specialized knowledge or practical experience in fields like literature, science, art, the cooperative movement, or social service. In states with a bicameral legislature, the Governor also nominates one member of the State Legislative Assembly from the Anglo-Indian community. Finally, the Governor decides questions of disqualification for state legislators, consulting the Election Commission to uphold electoral integrity.

A pivotal aspect of the Governor's legislative role involves bills passed by the state legislature. Upon receipt, the Governor has four options: granting assent, withholding assent, returning the bill (if not a money bill) for reconsideration—after which, if repassed with or without amendments, assent becomes mandatory—or reserving it for the President's consideration. Reservation is obligatory if the bill threatens the High Court's position, and discretionary in cases where it appears ultra vires (violating the Constitution), contravenes the Directive Principles of State Policy, harms the national interest, addresses issues of grave national importance, or pertains to compulsory property acquisition under Article 31A.

Among these powers, the Governor's ordinance-making authority stands out as particularly potent. When the state legislature is not in session, the Governor can promulgate ordinances with the force of law, provided they receive legislative approval within six weeks of reassembly. The Governor retains the flexibility to withdraw any ordinance at any time. Complementing these functions, the Governor lays key reports before the legislature, including those from the State Finance Commission, the State Public Service Commission, and the Comptroller and Auditor-General on state accounts, fostering transparency and accountability.

Financial Powers of the Governor

The Governor plays a pivotal role in overseeing the state's fiscal processes, ensuring legislative scrutiny and financial discipline. He mandates that the Annual Financial Statement—essentially the state budget—is laid before the state legislature, setting the stage for budgetary debates. Moreover, Money Bills can be introduced in the legislature only with his prior recommendation, and no demand for grants can proceed without his explicit approval. These checks reinforce his gatekeeping authority over public expenditure.

Beyond routine budgeting, the Governor holds discretionary powers for emergencies. He can authorize advances from the state's Contingency Fund to address unforeseen expenditures, providing a vital buffer until regular funds are allocated. Additionally, every five years, he constitutes a State Finance Commission to assess and recommend improvements in the financial health of panchayats and municipalities, aligning local governance with sustainable fiscal practices.

Judicial Powers of the Governor

The Governor wields several important judicial powers, which reinforce the state's judicial administration while maintaining constitutional checks and balances. Foremost among these is the authority to grant pardons, reprieves, respites, and remissions of punishment. The Governor may also suspend, remit, or commute the sentence of any person convicted of an offense under laws relating to matters within the state's executive domain. This pardoning power underscores the Governor's role as a merciful executive head in judicial matters.

Beyond pardons, the Governor plays a consultative role in higher judicial appointments: the President seeks the Governor's advice when appointing judges to the state's High Court. At the district level, the Governor directly handles the appointment, posting, and promotion of district judges, always in consultation with the State High Court to ensure merit and judicial independence. Additionally, the Governor appoints individuals to the state's judicial service—excluding district judges—after consulting both the State High Court and the State Public Service Commission, promoting a collaborative and transparent process.

These judicial functions lay the groundwork for understanding the Governor's broader discretionary powers. In the sections that follow, we delve deeper into three pivotal ones—the veto power, ordinance-making power, and pardoning power—by drawing systematic comparisons with their counterparts vested in the President.

Assent to Bills: Powers of the President and Governor

In India's parliamentary system, the process of transforming a bill into law hinges on the assent of the executive head—either the President at the Centre or the Governor in a state. This assent is the final procedural step after legislative passage, but the options available differ markedly between ordinary bills and Money Bills, as well as between Parliament and state legislatures. These powers reflect a delicate balance of checks and balances, designed to prevent hasty legislation while upholding democratic supremacy.

Ordinary Bills at the Centre

Consider an ordinary bill passed by both Houses of Parliament—either separately or at a joint sitting. It is then presented to the President, who holds three constitutional choices. First, he may grant assent, immediately converting the bill into an Act of Parliament. Second, he may withhold assent outright, effectively killing the bill through an absolute veto (though this is rarely exercised). Third, he may return the bill for reconsideration by the Houses. If Parliament passes it again—with or without amendments—the President must assent, limiting this to a suspensive veto. This mechanism ensures legislative will prevails without allowing indefinite presidential obstruction.

Ordinary Bills in States

The process mirrors the Centre for state ordinary bills, but with added layers due to federal dynamics. Whether passed by a unicameral legislative assembly or both Houses in a bicameral state legislature, the bill goes to the Governor, who enjoys four options. He may assent (enacting it as law), withhold assent (absolute veto), or return it for reconsideration (suspensive veto)—much like the President, where repassage obliges his assent. Uniquely, the Governor may also reserve the bill for the President's consideration, typically for bills repugnant to national interest or fundamental rights.

Upon reservation, the President steps in with three alternatives: assent (bill becomes Act, bypassing further Governor involvement), withholding assent (absolute veto), or returning it for state Houses' reconsideration within six months. If repassed—with or without changes—the President receives it again but is not bound to assent; he retains full veto power. This underscores the President's overriding authority in federal matters.

Money Bills at the Centre

Money Bills, which deal exclusively with taxation and public expenditure, follow a streamlined path. After passage by Parliament (where the Lok Sabha dominates), they reach the President with only two options: assent or withholding it. Critically, he cannot return a Money Bill for reconsideration, reflecting its urgency and the Lok Sabha's primacy. Conventionally, the President assents, as these bills originate with his prior recommendation.

Money Bills in States

State Money Bills—passed by the unicameral or bicameral legislature with the Governor's prior permission—present him three choices: assent, withholding (absolute veto), or reservation for the President. Like ordinary bills, the Governor cannot return it for reconsideration. If reserved, the President again has two stark options—assent or veto—with no return possible. Once assented, the bill becomes law without needing the Governor's further nod. In practice, Governors routinely assent to state Money Bills, given their introduction under executive prior approval.

This framework, enshrined in Articles 111, 200, and 201 of the Constitution, ensures executive restraint while safeguarding fiscal discipline and federal harmony. For aspirants, note the asymmetry: the President's veto is more absolute on reserved bills, emphasizing Centre's paramountcy.

Ordinance-Making Powers of the President

Under Article 123 of the Constitution, the President possesses the authority to promulgate ordinances when the normal legislative process cannot keep pace with urgent needs. This power activates only when both Houses of Parliament are not in session, or even when just one House is in session—a nuance that reflects the bicameral requirement for passing laws, which demands agreement from both. The President must be personally satisfied that exceptional circumstances necessitate immediate action, ensuring the power is not invoked lightly.

The scope of this authority mirrors Parliament's legislative domain: the President can legislate only on matters within Parliament's purview. An ordinance carries the full force of a parliamentary Act, yet it remains bound by the same constitutional limits—if Parliament could not enact a provision, neither can the ordinance. The President may withdraw it at any time, but this is not a discretionary choice; it requires the advice of the Council of Ministers headed by the Prime Minister.

Once promulgated, the ordinance must be laid before both Houses upon reassembly. It remains effective for six weeks from that point, unless both Houses pass resolutions disapproving it sooner. Notably, the President requires no prior instructions or approvals from any external authority to issue an ordinance.

Ordinance-Making Powers of the Governor

The Governor's ordinance-making power, enshrined in Article 213, parallels the President's in most respects but is tailored to the state level and federal oversight. It can be exercised when the state legislative assembly (in unicameral states) is not in session, or in bicameral states, when both Houses are not in session—or even when only one is sitting, again underscoring that state laws require bicameral consensus. Like the President, the Governor must be convinced that circumstances demand immediate action.

The power extends precisely to subjects within the state legislature's competence, with ordinances enjoying the same legal weight as state Acts, subject to identical constitutional constraints. The Governor can withdraw an ordinance anytime, but only on the advice of the Council of Ministers led by the Chief Minister—not as an independent discretion.

Upon reassembly, the ordinance goes before the legislative assembly or both Houses (in bicameral legislatures). It lapses after six weeks unless prolonged by legislation, or earlier if the assembly passes a disapproving resolution that the legislative council (if applicable) agrees to.

A key distinction lies in federal checks: unlike the President, the Governor cannot promulgate an ordinance without the President's prior instructions in three specific scenarios. These apply if a bill with identical provisions would have needed the President's previous sanction for introduction, if the Governor would have reserved such a bill for the President's consideration, or if the resulting state Act would be invalid without the President's assent. This ensures alignment with national interests in a federal framework.

Pardoning Powers: President vs. Governor

The President of India, under Article 72 of the Constitution, holds extensive clemency powers that extend across three key domains. First, the President can grant pardons, reprieves, respites, remissions, suspensions, or commutations for any punishment or sentence imposed on a person convicted of an offence under Central laws. Second, in cases involving death sentences, the President possesses the unique and exclusive authority to issue a full pardon, alongside the other forms of relief like reprieve, respite, remission, suspension, or commutation. Third, these powers also apply to sentences handed down by courts-martial, ensuring oversight even in military justice.

In contrast, the Governor, exercising powers under Article 161, mirrors the President's authority but only for offences against State laws. Thus, the Governor can pardon, reprieve, respite, remit, suspend, or commute punishments or sentences in such cases. However, a critical limitation applies to death sentences: the Governor cannot grant a full pardon, even if prescribed by state law—this prerogative rests solely with the President. The Governor may, nevertheless, suspend, remit, or commute a death sentence. Notably, the Governor lacks any authority over sentences from courts-martial, confining their role strictly to civilian state matters.

This structured division underscores the federal balance in India's constitutional framework, empowering the President with nationwide and military reach while delimiting the Governor's role to state-level civilian offences.

Constitutional Position of the Governor

India's Constitution establishes a parliamentary form of government at both the central and state levels. In this framework, the Governor serves as the nominal head of the state executive, while the real authority rests with the Council of Ministers, led by the Chief Minister. The Governor must exercise most powers and functions on the aid and advice of this Council, with a key exception: matters requiring the Governor's personal discretion, where ministerial advice does not apply.

To understand the Governor's role precisely, consider the foundational provisions in Articles 154, 163, and 164. Article 154 vests the state's executive power in the Governor, to be exercised either directly or through subordinate officers, always in line with the Constitution. Article 163 mandates a Council of Ministers, headed by the Chief Minister, to aid and advise the Governor in performing these functions—except where the Constitution requires discretionary action. Finally, Article 164 ensures the Council's collective responsibility to the state Legislative Assembly, forming the bedrock of parliamentary accountability in the states.

This setup marks a clear departure from the President's position at the Centre. Unlike the President, for whom the Constitution allows no scope for discretion, the Governor may act independently in specified situations. Moreover, while the 42nd Constitutional Amendment of 1976 made ministerial advice binding on the President, no parallel change applies to the Governor, preserving room for judgment.

The Constitution further clarifies that if a dispute arises over whether a matter falls within the Governor's discretion, the Governor's decision is final. No legal challenge can question the validity of actions taken on this basis. These instances of constitutional discretion—explicitly outlined in the Constitution—include reserving a state bill for the President's consideration; recommending President's Rule under Article 356; administering a neighboring Union Territory when holding additional charge; fixing royalty payments from mineral licenses to tribal district councils in Assam, Meghalaya, Tripura, and Mizoram; and seeking information from the Chief Minister on administrative or legislative matters.

Beyond this explicit discretion, the Governor also possesses situational discretion, much like the President. This arises from political exigencies rather than direct constitutional mandate and covers scenarios such as appointing a Chief Minister when no party commands a clear majority in the Legislative Assembly or when a sudden vacancy occurs without an obvious successor; dismissing the Council of Ministers if it fails to prove its confidence in the Assembly; or dissolving the Assembly after the Council loses its majority. These powers underscore the Governor's pivotal, albeit limited, role in maintaining constitutional stability amid uncertainty.