Governor’s discretion has its limits

Governor’s discretion has its limits

News:

The Supreme Court has observed that the appointment of K.G. Bopaiah as a pro tem speaker  by Karnataka Governor Vajubhai Vala is an arbitrary use of governor discretion.

Important facts:

1. The Supreme Court has ordered the Karnataka Governor to appoint a pro tem Speaker to conduct a floor test to decide the majority in the Karnataka Assembly.
2.  Article 180 (1) of the Constitution empowers the Governor to appoint a pro tem Speaker.
3. The Article says that if the chair of the Speaker falls vacant and there is no Deputy Speaker to fill the position, the duties of the office shall be performed “by such member of the Assembly as the Governor may appoint for the purpose”.
4. The BJP defends the Governor decision of appointing Pro tem speaker by quoting that Article 163 (2) of the Constitution mandates the “the validity of anything done by the Governor shall not be called in question on the ground that he ought or ought not to have acted in his discretion”.
5. Some other Supreme Court judgment on discretionary power of Governor.

• The Supreme Court ruled in 2016 that a Governor’s choice of action must not be arbitrary or fanciful. The Court ruled that Article 163 does not give Governors a “general discretionary power” and exercise of Governor’s discretion is limited.
• In Rebia Nabam case the Governor of the Arunachal Pradesh has advanced the date for the sixth Assembly session
• Supreme Court judgment in Rameshwar Prasad case, 2006 held that the “immunity granted to the Governor under Article 361 (1) does not affect the power of the Court to judicially scrutinize.

Recent cases of discretionary power of the Governor has raised the Concern for judicial review by the Supreme Court.