The recent political developments in Tamil Nadu following the 2026 Assembly elections have once again brought the constitutional role of the Governor into public debate. After the Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK) emerged as the single largest party, Governor Rajendra Arlekar delayed inviting party president C. Joseph Vijay to form the government and sought physical letters of support from at least 118 MLAs. The controversy has reignited discussions regarding gubernatorial discretion, floor tests, and constitutional morality in a hung Assembly.
Constitutional Position of the Governor
Under Article 164 of the Constitution of India, the Governor appoints the Chief Minister. However, the Constitution does not prescribe a fixed procedure for selecting a Chief Minister when no party secures a clear majority.
The Governor’s primary responsibility is to ensure the formation of a stable government while upholding constitutional governance. Although the Governor enjoys discretionary powers in such situations, these powers are not absolute and must operate within constitutional limits and judicial principles.
Governor’s Role in a Hung Assembly
In the event of a hung Assembly, the Governor is expected to:
- Explore all reasonable possibilities for government formation
- Consult political parties, alliances, and independent MLAs
- Ensure stability and avoid constitutional uncertainty
- Prevent political defections and horse-trading through timely action
The Sarkaria Commission recommended that Governors should act impartially and avoid political bias while exercising discretion.
Order of Preference in Government Formation
1. Pre-Poll Alliance with Majority
The first preference should be given to a pre-poll alliance that commands a clear majority in the Assembly.
This principle was recommended by the Sarkaria Commission and has received judicial recognition.
2. Single Largest Party
If no alliance secures majority support, the Governor may invite the single largest party to form the government, provided it can demonstrate majority support through alliances or external backing.
The Supreme Court clarified in the S. R. Bommai Case that a government need not independently possess a majority as long as it enjoys the confidence of the Legislative Assembly.
3. Post-Poll Alliances
Post-election coalitions are constitutionally valid if they can demonstrate majority support in the House.
The rise of coalition politics in India has made such alliances common and legitimate instruments of democratic government formation.
Importance of Floor Test
Over time, the Supreme Court has increasingly treated the floor test as the most objective and transparent method for determining majority support.
The Court has repeatedly emphasised that legislative majority must be tested on the floor of the Assembly rather than through the Governor’s subjective satisfaction.
Critics argue that insisting on physical letters of support before inviting a party to form the government may delay democratic processes and create opportunities for political manipulation.
Supreme Court’s Evolving Jurisprudence
Goa Political Crisis (2017)
The Supreme Court allowed Manohar Parrikar to be sworn in despite the Congress being the single largest party. However, the Court ordered an immediate floor test within 48 hours.
Karnataka Political Crisis (2018)
The Governor invited B. S. Yediyurappa to form the government and initially granted 15 days to prove majority.
Following judicial intervention, the Supreme Court reduced the deadline to 24 hours and directed an open floor test under live television coverage. Yediyurappa resigned before the vote.
These cases reinforced the principle that democratic legitimacy must ultimately be determined in the Legislative Assembly.
Concerns Regarding the Governor’s Discretion
Allegations of Political Bias
Governors are often accused of acting in favour of the ruling party at the Centre, especially in opposition-ruled states.
Delay in Government Formation
Excessive delays in inviting parties to form the government may create instability and encourage defections.
Misuse of Article 356
There are concerns that discretionary powers may be used to justify President’s Rule in politically sensitive situations.
Need for Reforms
Codified Guidelines
There is a growing demand for clear constitutional or statutory guidelines governing the Governor’s actions in hung Assemblies.
Time-bound Floor Tests
The Supreme Court has increasingly favoured immediate floor tests to prevent political uncertainty and horse-trading.
Ensuring Political Neutrality
The Governor’s office must function as an impartial constitutional authority rather than a political instrument.
Conclusion
The Governor plays a critical constitutional role in ensuring stable government formation during a hung Assembly. However, judicial precedents and constitutional conventions make it clear that the ultimate test of majority lies on the floor of the House and not in the subjective discretion of the Governor. Strengthening constitutional morality, impartiality, and time-bound democratic procedures is essential to preserve federalism and democratic legitimacy in India.