J&K LG should follow Council advice on Assembly nominations

Source: The post J&K LG should follow Council advice on Assembly nominations has been created, based on the article “Who decides nominations to UT Assemblies?” published in “The Hindu” on 19th August 2025. J&K LG should follow Council advice on Assembly nominations.

UPSC Syllabus Topic: GS Paper 3- issues and challenges pertaining to the federal structure

Context: The Union Home Ministry told the J&K and Ladakh High Court that J&K’s LG can nominate five MLAs without the Council of Ministers’ advice. This sparked debate on nomination powers in Union Territories and democratic accountability.

Current dispute: LG’s nomination power in J&K

1. Affidavit before the High Court: The Home Ministry stated that the LG may act without ministerial advice when nominating five MLAs. This is the core dispute.
   2. Question of aid and advice: The issue is whether the LG must follow the Council of Ministers. The affidavit says no.
   3. Scope of nominations: The power concerns a fixed statutory quota of nominees. Their addition may affect House composition.
   4. Implications for governance: In a tight House, nominated members can alter stability and legislative outcomes.

Constitutional and statutory framework

1. Parliament and States: Nominated seats exist in India’s legislatures. Anglo-Indian nominations ended in 2020. The Rajya Sabha has 12 nominated members, chosen by the President on Union Cabinet advice.
   2. Legislative Councils: In six States with Councils, nearly one-sixth are nominated by Governors on State Cabinet advice.
   3. Delhi’s model: The 1991 Act provides 70 elected MLAs. There are no nominated MLAs in Delhi.
   4. Puducherry’s model: The 1963 Act provides 30 elected MLAs, and the Union government may nominate up to three.

Judicial interpretation and guidance

1. Puducherry nomination case (2018): The Madras High Court upheld the Union’s power to nominate three MLAs without UT Cabinet advice.
   2. Recommendations and their fate: The High Court suggested statutory clarity, but the Supreme Court set aside these recommendations on appeal.
   3. Delhi services case (2023): The Supreme Court described a “triple chain of command”: civil servants → ministers → legislature → electorate. It held the LG is bound by ministerial advice, except where the Assembly lacks competence. This reasoning may inform nomination questions.

Democratic accountability and federal balance

1. UTs and elected governments: UTs are not full States. Yet UTs with Assemblies have elected governments accountable to the people.
   2. Political alignment issues: Alignment between the Centre and a UT eases nominations. Divergence should not derail democratic processes.
   3. Protecting mandates: Procedures should respect popular mandates and preserve stable governance.

The J&K path forward

1. Unique trajectory: J&K was a State until 2019, with greater autonomy.
   2. Judicial and executive signals: The Supreme Court upheld its conversion to a UT. The Union has said statehood will be restored at the earliest.
   3. Statutory specifics: J&K has 90 elected seats (2019 Act, amended 2023). Sections 15, 15A, 15B allow up to five nominees two women, two Kashmiri migrants, and one displaced person from PoK.
   4. Suggested approach: Given these factors, LG nominations should be on the Council’s advice. This would uphold democratic principles and electoral accountability.

Question for practice:

Discuss whether the J&K Lieutenant Governor can nominate Assembly members without the Council of Ministers’ advice.