Q. Consider the following statements:
1.There are no written grounds or procedures in the Constitution for removing governors.
2.In SR Bommai vs. Union of India, the Supreme Court has ruled that the determination of whether the State Government has the majority should be assessed on the floor of the House and not solely based on the subjective assessment of the Governor.
3.As per the Government of India Act 1858, the governor acted in accordance with the advice of Ministers of a province’s legislature, but retained special responsibilities and discretionary power.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
Explanation –
Statements 1 and 2 are correct. The Constitution does not enumerate specific grounds or procedures for the removal of Governors. Unlike certain constitutional offices, such as judges of the higher judiciary, Governors do not have fixed tenures or specific grounds for removal mentioned in the Constitution. In the S. R. Bommai case, the Supreme Court ruled that the governor should give the chief minister an opportunity to prove their majority in the state legislative assembly before recommending the imposition of President’s rule. This is known as the “floor test” and is considered a more objective way of assessing the stability of a government than relying solely on the governor’s subjective assessment.
Statement 3 is incorrect. As per the Government of India Act 1935, the governor acted in accordance with the advice of Ministers of a province’s legislature, but retained special responsibilities and discretionary power.
Under the Government of India Act 1858, provincial Governors were agents of the crown, functioning under the supervision of the Governor-General.
Source: Forum IAS
