Political appointment of Governor is against the true ethos of Indian Constitution

The Constitution of India provides a parallel executive, legislature and judiciary for the union and the states. The President is the Head of State for the whole of India and the Governor is the head of a state. No doubt that the Governor is appointed by the President under Article 155, whereas the President is elected under Article 54. This has been interpreted to mean that the Governor is the agent of the President and not an independent entity. Constitutionally that is a completely wrong interpretation, because in the matter of exercise of executive power, summoning of the Legislature, its prorogation and its dissolution, the Governor is totally independent of the President. Otherwise, the Governor, under Article 163, functions according to the aid and advice of his Council of Ministers, not that of the President. In legislative matters, it is the Governor who gives assent to Bills passed by the State Legislature, unless he reserves any for the prior approval of the President. Just as the President functions according to the aid and advice of his Council of Ministers, the Governor is in exactly the same position vis-à-vis the State and, therefore, the two offices of President and Governor are in parallel and not in a position of superiority or subordination.

The Governors, under the scheme of things in the Indian Constitution, have an independent place of their own and are expected to function as impartial Heads of States within the territory of their own State. This brings us to the question of what sort of persons should be appointed as Governors. What should be their qualifications or other competence to occupy this high office? Unfortunately, the Constitution is silent on this behalf except to state what is given in Article 157, that is, that no one who is not a citizen of India can be appointed as a Governor and that the person so appointed should have completed thirty-five years of age. Under Article 158, the Governor shall not be a Member of Parliament or of a State Legislature and on his assuming office, if he is such a Member of a Legislature, he will be deemed to have vacated his seat in the House. Secondly, the Governor is prohibited from holding any other office of profit. Other than this there are no qualifications laid down for appointment as Governor. Theoretically, he can be uneducated with a low intelligence quotient (IQ), with no record of public service or professional ability and, at least in explicit terms, is not even required to be sane. This probably means that even a certifiable lunatic could be appointed as Governor because there is no constitutional prohibition on this behalf. The Governor can be partisan, affiliated to a political party, but he can still be appointed as Governor. Is this the kind of person we need as Head of State?

It is a fact of which we can take notice that since 1967 (initiation of Mrs Gandhi’s Rule), all successive Governments, be it single majority or coalition, basically had four unspoken criteria for the appointment of Governors. They were (1) Party hacks who had put in a few decades of service to the party at the menial or low-grade political level, who have expectations that now that the party has come to power their loyalty will be rewarded. (2) If the State Government is to be destabilised, then send in a political person as Governor. (3) Where the Prime Minister and the Chief Minister of a State are on good terms, then send a Governor with the Chief Minister’s approval. (4) Decrepit politicians aged almost to the point of senility, with major health problems, could be sent to a Raj Bhavan to enjoy its comforts and avail of the high-quality medical services which would be available to the Governor. In other words, use the Raj Bhavan as a nursing home for the aged and the sick.

Right from the time of Indira Gandhi, the post of Governor has been used for picking people who are party loyalists and want a comfortable position for themselves because they are otherwise worthless. It is unfortunate that the unspoken criteria laid down by the Congress party have been adopted wholeheartedly by every government which has succeeded Indira Gandhi. Every successive government does just the same, but one had expectations from Narendra Modi that he would understand the constitutional importance of the post of Governor and would appoint persons who could act in a nonpartisan manner. Unfortunately, that has not happened. This is not what we expect of our government and by sending middle-level politicians as Governors, a post which by its very nature should be apolitical.

Of course, there will be controversy about any suggestions made regarding the qualifications for the post of Governor but as a starting point of debate, one should attempt some suggestions or a few considerations which must go into the appointment of a person as Governor. First and foremost, no active politician should ever be appointed as Governor. This means that for at least five years prior to such appointment the person should not have participated in any active politics, nor should formally be a member of any political party. The person appointed should not be more than seventy years of age and should not be considered for more than one additional term of reappointment. The person should have had formal education at least to the collegiate level. The person could be a professional such as a lawyer, doctor, etc. He could be a technocrat, an academician, a renowned architect, a person who has earned distinction in literature, someone who earned distinction as an administrator or diplomat, a successful farmer, environmentalist or social activist, or someone who has served the armed forces or the police and has earned a reputation for integrity and professional competence, a businessman with a clean record or anyone from any profession who has exhibited the ability to think and perform, whilst earning a reputation for honesty. The present government led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, which is a pathfinder in so many such matters, would perform a great service to India if it codifies the principles on which Governors should be selected. In the long run, an impartial Governor would always be more useful to the nation than one who is partisan.