In its sharpest-ever criticism of abuse of the Governor’s office by politicians, the Supreme Court today wondered if the high constitutional office has been reduced to a ‘‘party office extension’’.‘‘Would you agree if I say that the Governor’s office is acting as an extension of the party office?’’ Justice Arijit Pasayat asked Solicitor General Ghulam E Vahanvati during the hearing of a PIL challenging Bihar Governor Buta Singh’s recommendation to dissolve the State Assembly.The petition is being heard by a five-judge Constitution Bench comprising Justice Pasayat, Justice Y K Sabharwal, Justice K G Balakrishnan, Justice Ashok Bhan and Justice B N Agrawal.Justice Pasayat added: ‘‘Isn’t it a fact that the Governor’s office has largely become a political post or an appeasement post? Otherwise, why doesn’t the various governments accept the proposals of the Sarkaria Commission?’’Earlier, Justice Sabharwal, too, conveyed his disenchantment with political parties for not following the Sarkaria recommendations. The Commission had suggested that Governors be free of politics and recommended clauses like a fixed tenure for their office.‘‘One day, a man is Chief Minister, next day he is Governor. Human beings are not machines who will switch over just like that. unfortunately, there are people who claim we have to follow a political agenda even after assuming office,’’ Justice Sabharwal said.Joining issue, Justice Suraj Bhan said, ‘‘One party comes to power at the Centre and dismisses Governors at its whim.’’The Solicitor General, however, said Buta was only trying to save democracy, which was at risk in Bihar. On the split in the LJP and the move by a chunk of its MLAs to join the JD(U), he said it was difficult to admit that it was an ‘‘ideological realignment.’’The Supreme Court also quizzed Vahanvati on the material which had formed the basis for Buta’s report recommending dissolution. ‘‘The report is vague and full of surmises,’’ it said. ‘‘His assumption has to be supported by objective material, but he had none,’’ it added.The Solicitor General denied this and said the report was based on Intelligence inputs, source information and newspaper reports.Justice Sabharwal clarified, ‘‘We are not saying it is partisan. All we say is there should have been more details for his conclusions.’’
