Governor (Article 153)

Article 153 of the Constitution of India establishes that there shall be a Governor for each state, and a single person may be appointed Governor for two or more states under the proviso added by the Constitution (Seventh Amendment) Act, 1956. The office is the state-level analogue of the President, framed within Part VI of the Constitution, which deals with the executive of the states. Article 154 vests the executive power of the state in the Governor, to be exercised either directly or through officers subordinate to the office in accordance with the Constitution. The constitutional design draws heavily on the Government of India Act, 1935, which created provincial Governors, though the framers under B. R. Ambedkar deliberately recast the post as a nominated, non-elected office answerable to the Union rather than to a provincial electorate, a choice debated extensively in the Constituent Assembly between 30 May and 1 June 1949.

The procedural mechanics begin with appointment under Article 155, by which the Governor is appointed by the President by warrant under hand and seal—in practice on the advice of the Union Council of Ministers led by the Prime Minister. Article 156 fixes the tenure: the Governor holds office during the pleasure of the President, ordinarily for five years from entering office, and may resign by writing addressed to the President or continue beyond term until a successor enters office. Article 157 prescribes the qualifications—the appointee must be a citizen of India and have completed thirty-five years of age—while Article 158 bars the Governor from membership of Parliament or a state legislature, from holding any other office of profit, and entitles the officeholder to emoluments and allowances determined by Parliament under the Second Schedule.

The Governor's functions divide into those exercised on the aid and advice of the state council of ministers under Article 163 and those exercised in personal discretion. Article 164 makes the Chief Minister appointed by the Governor, with other ministers appointed on the Chief Minister's advice, the council collectively responsible to the Legislative Assembly. The Governor summons, prorogues, and dissolves the legislature under Article 174, addresses it under Article 176, and assents to, withholds assent from, or reserves a bill for the President's consideration under Article 200. Article 201 governs the subsequent presidential decision on reserved bills. The Governor also holds the power to promulgate ordinances under Article 213 when the legislature is not in session, appoints the Advocate-General under Article 165, and exercises the pardoning power under Article 161 for offences against state laws.

Contemporary practice has made the office a recurrent flashpoint. In Maharashtra in November 2019, Governor Bhagat Singh Koshyari administered the oath to Devendra Fadnavis in a pre-dawn ceremony that the Supreme Court effectively unwound within days. In Tamil Nadu, Governor R. N. Ravi withheld assent to bills for extended periods, prompting the state government to approach the Supreme Court, which in its April 2025 judgment in State of Tamil Nadu v. Governor held that the Governor cannot indefinitely sit on bills and prescribed timelines for action under Article 200. In Punjab in 2023, Governor Banwarilal Purohit's refusal to convene an Assembly session likewise reached the Court, which reaffirmed that the Governor acts on ministerial advice in summoning the House.

The Governor must be distinguished from the Chief Minister, the elected leader who wields real executive authority and to whom the council of ministers is responsible; the Governor is a nominated figurehead whose substantive acts follow ministerial advice. The office differs from the President in that Article 163 expressly preserves a sphere of discretionary judgment ("by or under this Constitution required to act in his discretion") that has no exact parallel in Article 74 governing the President. The Governor is also distinct from a Lieutenant Governor or Administrator of a Union Territory appointed under Article 239, who functions as the President's agent under a different constitutional regime, as litigated in the 2018 Government of NCT of Delhi v. Union of India judgment.

The principal controversies concern discretion and partisanship. The Sarkaria Commission (1988) and the Punchhi Commission (2010) both recommended that Governors be appointed in consultation with the Chief Minister, serve fixed tenures insulated from arbitrary removal, and refrain from acting as Union agents. S. R. Bommai v. Union of India (1994) curtailed the misuse of the Governor's report under Article 356 to dismiss state governments, mandating a floor test as the proper measure of majority. Rameshwar Prasad v. Union of India (2006) invalidated the dissolution of the Bihar Assembly premised on a Governor's report, and Nabam Rebia v. Deputy Speaker (2016) restricted the Governor's discretion in summoning sessions and addressing assembly disqualification matters.

For the working practitioner—whether a state desk officer, constitutional lawyer, or analyst tracking centre-state relations—the Governor is the institutional hinge of Indian federalism, simultaneously a ceremonial head and a potential instrument of Union influence over state politics. Understanding the precise scope of Articles 163, 200, 213, and 356, alongside the evolving Supreme Court jurisprudence on assent timelines and discretionary limits, is essential to assessing the durability of state governments and the federal balance. The office remains among the most litigated and politically contested institutions in the Indian constitutional order.