Gubernatorial walkouts test constitutional limits, Pg8

Key Highlights:

• Governors in Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, and Kerala walked out of the inaugural State Legislative Assembly sessions.
• Article 176 (1) mandates Governors to address the Assembly at the first session of each year.
• The Karnataka government may approach the Supreme Court regarding the constitutionality of these walkouts.
• The Supreme Court has held that Governors' discretionary powers are limited and cannot negate the powers of a responsible government.

Detailed Insights:

• The Governor's address articulates the policy of the State Cabinet, whose advice the Governors are expected to follow.
• Dr. B.R. Ambedkar stated that the Governor is the representative of the people as a whole, not of a party.
• A seven-judge Bench of the Supreme Court in the 1974 Shamsher Singh versus State of Punjab case observed that Governors publicly criticizing government policy is unconstitutional.
• The 2016 Nabam Rebia case clarified the Governor's powers regarding assent to Bills, appointment/dismissal of the Chief Minister, and President’s rule under Article 356.
• Addressing the House under Article 175(1) or making a special address under Article 176(1) are executive functions performed on the advice of the Council of Ministers.
• The Supreme Court has cautioned against allowing Governors excessive discretion, which could undermine Parliamentary democracy.

Key Concepts Involved:

• Article 176 (1): Mandates the Governor's address to the Legislative Assembly at the commencement of the first session each year.
• Article 356: Deals with President's rule in a state, based on the Governor's report.
• Discretionary Powers: Powers of the Governor that can be exercised without the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers, as plainly stated in the Constitution.