State Executive: Articles 163 and 164

India's Constitution establishes a parliamentary system of government in the states, mirroring the model at the Union level. Consequently, the council of ministers, led by the chief minister, serves as the real executive authority within a state's politico-administrative framework, wielding effective power while the governor acts primarily in a ceremonial role.

This council is formed and operates much like its counterpart at the Centre, drawing legitimacy from the state legislative assembly and remaining collectively responsible to it. The chief minister is typically the leader of the majority party or coalition, who advises the governor on appointing other ministers.

Although the Constitution does not elaborate on the principles of this parliamentary system in detail, two key provisions—Article 163 and Article 164—outline them in broad strokes. Article 163 addresses the status of the council of ministers, mandating that the chief minister heads it and that it aids and advises the governor, who must act on such advice except in specific discretionary matters. Article 164, in turn, covers the appointment of ministers by the governor, their tenure (which lasts at the pleasure of the governor), collective and individual responsibility to the legislative assembly, required qualifications (such as assembly membership within six months of appointment), oaths of office and secrecy, and provisions for salaries and allowances. Together, these articles provide the foundational framework for state executives, ensuring accountability and alignment with democratic norms.

Council of Ministers and Governors Discretion

Article 163 of the Indian Constitution establishes the foundational framework for the executive machinery in a state by mandating a Council of Ministers, headed by the Chief Minister, to aid and advise the Governor in exercising his functions. This principle underscores the principle of collective responsibility, ensuring that the Governor, as the state's nominal head, generally acts on the counsel of his ministers—except in those rare instances where the Constitution expressly requires him to exercise his personal discretion.

Should any dispute arise over whether a particular matter falls within the Governor's discretionary domain, his decision on the point stands as final and binding. Consequently, the validity of any action taken by the Governor cannot be challenged in a court of law merely on the grounds that he should or should not have invoked his discretion. Furthermore, to safeguard the smooth functioning of government, the substance of the advice tendered by the ministers to the Governor remains beyond judicial scrutiny, insulating internal deliberations from external interference. This provision thus balances accountability with the autonomy essential for effective governance.

Article 164: Other Provisions as to Ministers

The appointment of ministers in a state follows a clear hierarchy under Article 164. The Governor appoints the Chief Minister, while other ministers are appointed on the Chief Minister's advice. A notable exception applies to Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh, and Odisha, where a dedicated Minister for tribal welfare must be appointed; this role may also encompass the welfare of Scheduled Castes, backward classes, or additional responsibilities. Bihar was explicitly exempted from this requirement through the 94th Constitutional Amendment Act, 2006. Ministers serve at the Governor's pleasure, ensuring accountability at the highest level.

To promote efficient governance, the 91st Constitutional Amendment Act, 2003, introduced key safeguards on the council's size and eligibility. The total number of ministers, including the Chief Minister, cannot exceed 15% of the state's Legislative Assembly strength, with a minimum of 12 ministers regardless of assembly size. Moreover, members of the state legislature disqualified for defection under anti-defection laws are barred from ministerial positions, curbing opportunistic politics.

The council of ministers remains collectively responsible to the Legislative Assembly, upholding parliamentary principles. The Governor administers oaths of office and secrecy to ministers, and salaries along with allowances are set by the state legislature. Finally, a minister who is not a member of the state legislature must secure membership within six consecutive months, or they cease to hold office, preventing prolonged executive dominance without legislative mandate.

Article 166: Conduct of Business of the Government of a State

Article 166 of the Indian Constitution lays down essential procedural norms for the executive functioning of state governments, ensuring uniformity, accountability, and efficiency in decision-making. At its core, the provision mandates that all executive actions of a state government must be explicitly expressed as taken in the name of the Governor. This formal requirement underscores the Governor's constitutional role as the nominal head of the state executive, channeling all governmental authority through this symbolic figurehead, even though real power typically resides with the Council of Ministers.

To safeguard the legitimacy of these actions, orders and instruments issued in the Governor's name must be authenticated in a manner prescribed by rules framed by the Governor himself. Crucially, once properly authenticated, the validity of such an order or instrument cannot be challenged in court merely on the grounds that it was not personally made or executed by the Governor. This clause protects administrative efficiency by shielding routine governmental decisions from technical legal scrutiny, provided procedural formalities are followed.

Finally, the Governor is empowered to make rules that facilitate the smooth transaction of state government business and its allocation among ministers. These rules, however, apply only to business not requiring the Governor's personal discretion—such as matters explicitly reserved for his independent judgment under the Constitution. This framework promotes orderly governance while respecting the boundaries of ministerial responsibility and gubernatorial oversight.

Article 167: Duties of the Chief Minister

Article 167 of the Indian Constitution clearly defines the Chief Minister's obligations to the Governor, ensuring transparency and accountability in state governance. At its core, the Chief Minister must keep the Governor fully informed by communicating all decisions of the Council of Ministers on administrative matters and legislative proposals. This duty fosters a vital link between the executive and the state's constitutional head, preventing unilateral actions from bypassing oversight.

Beyond routine updates, the Chief Minister is required to provide any additional information the Governor requests about the state's administration or pending legislation. This empowers the Governor to seek clarity on critical issues. Furthermore, if the Governor deems it necessary, the Chief Minister must bring before the full Council of Ministers for reconsideration any decision taken independently by an individual minister—one that has not yet been collectively deliberated. These provisions collectively reinforce collective responsibility while maintaining the Governor's role as a safeguard in state affairs.

Article 177: Rights of Ministers in State Legislative Houses

Article 177 of the Indian Constitution grants state ministers distinct privileges within the state legislature, ensuring they can contribute effectively to legislative debates without full membership status. Specifically, every minister holds the right to speak and actively participate in the proceedings of the Legislative Assembly. Where a state operates a bicameral system with a Legislative Council, this privilege extends to that upper house as well. The same rights apply to any committee of the state legislature on which the minister serves as a named member.

Critically, however, ministers face a clear limitation: they are not entitled to vote in these proceedings. This provision balances ministerial accountability with the separation of executive and legislative roles, allowing ministers to defend government policies while reserving voting power for elected representatives.

Nature of Advice by Ministers

Article 163 of the Constitution mandates that the Governor must be aided and advised by a Council of Ministers, headed by the Chief Minister, in exercising all functions except those explicitly reserved for the Governor's discretion. If a dispute arises over whether a particular matter falls within this discretionary domain, the Governor's determination is final. No court can challenge the validity of the Governor's actions on the grounds that they should or should not have been exercised discretionarily. Moreover, courts are barred from inquiring into the nature or content of the advice provided by the ministers. These provisions underscore the deeply confidential and trusted relationship between the Governor and the Council of Ministers, shielding their deliberations from external scrutiny.

The Supreme Court has further illuminated these principles through key rulings. In 1971, it held that a Council of Ministers must always be in place to tender advice to the Governor, even following the dissolution of the state legislative assembly or the resignation of a ministry. Consequently, the outgoing Council may continue in office until a successor takes charge, ensuring continuity in governance. Building on this, the Court clarified in 1974 that, outside spheres of personal discretion, the Governor is bound to act strictly on the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers. The Governor cannot act independently, without such advice, or in opposition to it. Importantly, wherever the Constitution refers to the "satisfaction of the Governor," this is not the Governor's personal satisfaction but that of the Council of Ministers collectively—reinforcing the principle of ministerial responsibility in India's parliamentary system.

Appointment of Ministers

The Governor appoints the Chief Minister of a state, who then advises on the selection of other ministers. Acting on this advice, the Governor formally appoints them, ensuring that only individuals recommended by the Chief Minister assume these roles. This process underscores the Chief Minister's pivotal authority in forming the Council of Ministers.

A notable exception applies in states with significant tribal populations: Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh, and Odisha must include a dedicated Minister for Tribal Welfare in their Council. This requirement, originally mandated for Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, and Odisha, was amended by the 94th Constitutional Amendment Act, 2006. The Act relieved Bihar of this obligation—owing to the absence of Scheduled Areas and a negligible Scheduled Tribes population there—while extending it to the newly carved-out states of Chhattisgarh and Jharkhand.

Ministers are typically drawn from the state legislature, whether the Legislative Assembly or the Legislative Council. However, the Governor may appoint someone who is not a member of either House. Such an appointee must secure membership—through election or nomination—within six months, or they automatically vacate the position.

A minister belonging to one House enjoys the right to speak and participate in proceedings of the other House but retains voting rights only in their own House. This arrangement fosters legislative coordination while preserving the distinct representational roles of each chamber.

Oaths and Salaries of Ministers

Before assuming office, every minister must take two essential oaths administered by the Governor: the oath of office and the oath of secrecy. These oaths underscore the minister's unwavering commitment to constitutional duties and confidentiality.

In the oath of office, the minister pledges to bear true faith and allegiance to the Constitution of India, uphold the sovereignty and integrity of the nation, faithfully and conscientiously fulfill the responsibilities of the position, and administer justice to all people in accordance with the Constitution and laws—without fear, favor, affection, or ill will. Complementing this, the oath of secrecy binds the minister to never directly or indirectly disclose any information that comes to their notice in their official capacity, except when necessary for the proper performance of their duties.

Ministers' salaries and allowances, meanwhile, are set by the state legislature and revised periodically. These match those of a member of the state legislature, supplemented by a sumptuary allowance scaled to the minister's rank, free official accommodation, travel allowances, medical facilities, and other perks. This structure ensures ministers are adequately supported while remaining accountable to the legislature.

Collective Responsibility

At the heart of India's parliamentary system lies the principle of collective responsibility, which ensures that the Council of Ministers functions as a unified team. As enshrined in Article 164 of the Constitution, the Council is collectively responsible to the state's Legislative Assembly. This means every minister shares joint accountability for all government actions—whether through acts of commission or omission. They stand or fall together: a no-confidence motion passed against the Council in the Assembly triggers the resignation of all ministers, including those from the Legislative Council.

If the Council loses the Assembly's confidence, it may advise the Governor to dissolve the House, arguing that it no longer reflects the electorate's will, and call for fresh elections. However, the Governor is not bound to accept this advice from a Council that has already forfeited the Assembly's trust.

This principle extends further: Cabinet decisions are binding on all ministers, even those who opposed them during deliberations. Every minister must publicly defend these decisions, both inside and outside the state legislature. Disagreement is no excuse—any minister unwilling to support the Cabinet must resign. History records several such resignations, underscoring the unwavering discipline demanded by this foundational norm.

Individual Responsibility

Article 164 of the Indian Constitution embodies the principle of individual ministerial responsibility, complementing the broader doctrine of collective accountability. It stipulates that ministers hold office solely at the governor's pleasure, granting the governor the authority to dismiss a minister—even when the council of ministers as a whole retains the confidence of the legislative assembly.

However, this power is not exercised arbitrarily. The governor acts only on the advice of the chief minister, ensuring that realpolitik remains firmly under executive leadership. If the chief minister harbors differences of opinion or dissatisfaction with a minister's performance, they may demand the minister's resignation or formally advise the governor to effect dismissal. Through this mechanism, the chief minister enforces discipline within the cabinet, safeguarding the rule of collective responsibility by promptly addressing individual lapses that could undermine the ministry's unity and effectiveness.

Mirroring the arrangement at the Centre, the Indian Constitution makes no provision for the legal responsibility of ministers in the states—a principle rooted in British parliamentary tradition where ministers personally assume liability for official acts by countersigning executive orders. Consequently, a Governor's order for any public act does not require a minister's countersignature. Adding to this shield, courts are expressly barred from inquiring into the nature or content of advice tendered by ministers to the Governor, ensuring that such deliberations remain beyond judicial review.

Composition of the Council of Ministers

The Indian Constitution leaves the size and internal ranking of a state's Council of Ministers entirely to the discretion of the Chief Minister, who tailors it to the political demands and administrative needs of the moment. This flexibility mirrors the arrangement at the national level, where the council comprises three tiers of ministers—cabinet ministers, ministers of state, and deputy ministers—differentiated primarily by their rank, salary, and influence. At the apex stands the Chief Minister, the undisputed head of the state government.

Cabinet ministers hold the reins of key departments, such as home affairs, education, finance, and agriculture. As full-fledged members of the state cabinet, they participate in its deliberations and shape major policies, bearing collective responsibility for the government's overall functioning.

Ministers of state, positioned below them, may receive independent charge of smaller departments or serve as deputies to cabinet ministers. Unlike their seniors, they are not cabinet members and only join meetings when specifically invited to discuss matters pertaining to their portfolios.

The lowest rung is occupied by deputy ministers, who lack independent departmental responsibilities and instead support cabinet ministers in administrative, legislative, and political tasks. They, too, stay outside the cabinet and do not attend its sessions.

Occasionally, the council includes one or more deputy chief ministers, a position typically created to accommodate coalition dynamics or regional political considerations rather than any constitutional mandate. This structure ensures efficient governance while adapting to the state's unique circumstances.

State Cabinet: Functions and Authority

At the heart of the Council of Ministers lies the Cabinet, a compact group composed exclusively of senior cabinet ministers. This inner circle forms the true nucleus of authority in the state government, wielding decisive influence over its operations.

The Cabinet stands as the pinnacle of decision-making in the state's politico-administrative framework. It crafts the government's core policies, exercises supreme executive power, and ensures seamless coordination across state administration. Beyond these foundational roles, it serves as the Governor's primary advisory body, deftly manages crises by tackling all emergencies, and oversees critical legislative and financial matters.

In addition, the Cabinet holds sway over high-level appointments, including those of constitutional authorities and senior secretariat administrators, thereby reinforcing its command over the state's governance machinery.

Cabinet Committees

In the functioning of a state cabinet, specialized bodies known as cabinet committees play a pivotal role. These committees allow the cabinet to address complex matters efficiently by dividing responsibilities among smaller groups of ministers.

Cabinet committees fall into two main categories: standing committees, which are permanent fixtures designed for ongoing issues, and ad hoc committees, which are temporary and disbanded once their specific task is complete. The Chief Minister establishes these committees based on the pressing needs of the moment and the demands of the situation. As a result, their number, names, and membership fluctuate over time, adapting flexibly to evolving priorities.

Beyond merely identifying problems and drafting proposals for full cabinet review, these committees hold the authority to make binding decisions. That said, the cabinet retains the power to scrutinize and, if necessary, overturn those decisions, ensuring collective accountability at the highest level.