Speaker vs Governor: In the past, SC ruled in favour of floor test

In the Arunachal and Uttarakhand cases, the House was in suspended animation as President’s Rule had been imposed. The Supreme Court ordered that the House be summoned and a floor test held to end the impasse.

“If the House is adjourned sine die or prorogued without holding a floor test, then all options are open before the Governor. However, since this is the Budget Session, such adjournment without passing the Budget means that the government has collapsed,” said a senior advocate.

Earlier, the Sarkaria Commission had recommended that, if the CM neglects or refuses to summon the Assembly for a floor test, the Governor should summon the Assembly.

However, when the House is in session, the question of whether the court can direct the Speaker to hold a floor test is yet to be settled. This question was referred to a larger bench in 2016, which is yet to be constituted.

In the case of Karnataka in July last year, the Supreme Court had directed the Speaker to conduct the floor test forthwith when the House was in session. Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, who appeared for then Speaker K R Ramesh, had questioned the jurisdiction of the court.

Article 212 of the Constitution bars courts from inquiring into proceedings of the Legislature.

In 1998, in the Jagadambika Pal case, the SC had ordered a composite floor test when the House was in session. However, in that case, there were two claimants to the chief minister’s post.

Curated For You

Falling sick in Brazil showed me what India gets wrong about antibiotics

‘He was going to be the first boy to play in the English Premier League’: Parmeet Sethi recalls son’s battle with depression after a career-ending injury; how parents can recognise early signs

Dhurandhar box office collection day 3: Aditya Dhar’s spy thriller becomes Ranveer Singh’s fastest film to hit Rs 100 crore mark