In Tamil Nadu, Vijay’s swearing-in delayed: What is the Governor’s role in a hung Assembly

What is a Governor’s role in case an Assembly election doesn’t throw up a clear winner? How have Governors acted in similar situations in the past, and why has that led to controversy?

First, the Tamil Nadu numbers

After TVK is the DMK-led alliance and the ADMK alliance, neither of which has a majority. The DMK is the next largest party with 59 seats, the ADMK has 47 seats, the Congress 5, and the Pattali Makkal Katchi has 4. There are other smaller parties with one to two seats.

The Congress has announced it will join hands with the TVK, but they still need the support of the smaller parties. A parallel channel of talks had also been initiated between the TVK and the ADMK, backed by the BJP. Thus, the composition of the new government is technically not clear yet, with both BJP and Congress having the chance to be in the ruling coalition.

Whom should the Governor call: Sarkaria and Punchhi commissions norms

In June 1983, the Centre set up the Justice R S Sarkaria Commission to examine the relationship between state and central governments. The Commission, which dealt with the role of Governors, suggested that in choosing a Chief Minister, the Governor should be guided by the following principles:

*The party or combination of parties that command the widest support in the Legislative Assembly should be called to form the government.

* The Governor’s task is to see that a government is formed — and not to try to form a government that will pursue policies that he approves.

* If no party has a majority, the Governor has to invite: a) a pre-poll alliance, b) the largest single party that is able to gain majority support, c) a post-election coalition that has the required members, d) a post-election coalition in which partners are willing to extend outside support.

The Commission recommended that the Chief Minister must seek a vote of confidence in the Assembly within 30 days of taking over. It also said the Governor should not risk determining the issue of majority support outside the Assembly, and that the prudent course would be to have the claims tested on the floor of the House.

Then in 2007, a Commission headed by former Chief Justice of India M M Punchhi was set up to take a fresh look at the roles and responsibilities of governments at various levels, and the relations between them. The Commission recommended that there should be clear guidelines for the appointment of Chief Ministers, so that there was some regulation on the discretionary power of the Governor.

It said that a pre-poll alliance must be treated as one political party, and laid down the order of precedence that the Governor must follow in case of a hung House:

1) Group with the largest pre-poll alliance commanding the largest number;

2) Single largest party with support of others;

3) Post-electoral coalition with all parties joining the government;

4) Post-electoral alliance with some parties joining the government, and the remaining, including Independents, supporting from outside.

Some recent cases

Over the years, Governors have often not followed a uniform course of action in case of a hung Assembly, and thus courted controversies. While this is a long trend, here are some recent examples:

In 2017, in both Goa and Mizoram, Congress had emerged as the single largest party, lacking a clear majority. The Governors (Mridula Sinha and Najma Heptullah, respectively) invited the BJP to form a government based on letters of support it showed from other smaller parties.

In 2018 in Karnataka, the BJP emerged as the single largest party, but the Congress and the JD(S) formed a post-poll alliance. The Governor invited BJP leader BS Yediyurappa, who even took oath as CM, but resigned after the Opposition moved court and he was ordered to prove majority within 24 hours.

When the Congress was in power at the Centre before 2014, Governors were often accused of working to further its interests.