#363: Governor & hung assembly!
Beauty of Indian constitution
What Exactly Does a Governor Do in a Hung Assembly?
Every time election results throw up a hung assembly, the same questions return.
Who will the Governor invite first?
Can the single largest party form government?
Can post-poll alliances claim power?
How much discretion does the Governor actually have?
And suddenly, terms like floor test, constitutional morality, and Article 164 start appearing everywhere.
But this is not just political drama.
This is one of the most sensitive constitutional situations in a parliamentary democracy
.
First: What is a hung assembly?
A hung assembly happens when no political party or alliance crosses the majority mark after elections.
In such situations, government formation becomes uncertain because nobody has clear numerical support in the House.
This is where the Governor’s role becomes important.
What does the Constitution say?
Under Article 164 of the Constitution, the Governor appoints the Chief Minister.
But the Constitution does not clearly define the exact procedure the Governor must follow in a hung assembly. That is why conventions, commissions, and Supreme Court judgments become important.
The Governor’s primary responsibility is to ensure that:
a stable government is formed, and
constitutional machinery is maintained.
At the same time, the Governor must remain politically neutral.
What has the Supreme Court said?
One of the most important observations came in the Rameshwar Prasad vs Union of India (2006) case.
The Supreme Court said that the Governor cannot act based on personal assumptions or political preferences while assessing who may form government.
The Court warned that:
if the Governor acts with bias, it can damage parliamentary democracy itself.
The judgment also stressed that:
the Governor should explore all reasonable possibilities of government formation, and
constitutional processes should not be disrupted unnecessarily.
Then who should the Governor invite first?
This question was examined by the Sarkaria Commission (1988), which suggested an order of preference.
According to the Commission, the Governor should ideally invite:
1. A pre-poll alliance commanding majority
This is considered the most legitimate because voters were already aware of the alliance before elections.
2. The single largest party with support of others
If it can demonstrate majority support.
3. A post-poll coalition with all partners joining government
A stable coalition formed after elections.
4. A post-poll alliance where some parties provide outside support
This is generally treated as the least stable option.
These are conventions, not binding constitutional rules, but they are widely referred to during political crises.
Why is the “floor test” so important?
In almost every hung assembly controversy, the Supreme Court eventually emphasizes one thing:
Majority must be tested on the floor of the House.
Not through:
letters,
media claims,
Raj Bhavan meetings,
or parades of MLAs.
The idea is simple:
the Assembly alone can determine whether a government enjoys majority support.
The S.R. Bommai case changed everything
The landmark S.R. Bommai vs Union of India (1994) judgment became extremely important in matters related to majority and government stability.
The Supreme Court held that:
the proper place to test majority is the legislative assembly floor.
This judgment significantly reduced arbitrary dismissal of state governments under Article 356.
It also strengthened parliamentary democracy by ensuring that elected governments cannot be removed merely on the Governor’s subjective reports.
What about Article 356?
This article allows President’s Rule if constitutional machinery fails in a state.
But courts have repeatedly warned that:
Article 356 cannot be used casually,
and Governors should not recommend it without exhausting democratic options first.
This became particularly important after repeated misuse of President’s Rule in earlier decades.
Real examples where floor tests became controversial
Karnataka (2018)
The Governor invited the single largest party to form government and gave time to prove majority. The matter quickly reached the Supreme Court, which ordered an expedited floor test.
Maharashtra (2019)
A dramatic early-morning swearing-in ceremony triggered legal and political controversy. The Supreme Court intervened and directed a floor test almost immediately.
Jharkhand, Goa, Tamil Nadu
Similar debates emerged over:
timing of floor tests,
Governor’s discretion,
and competing claims of majority support.
In most cases, courts preferred a quick floor test as the fairest constitutional solution.
So what is the Governor supposed to do?
The Governor is expected to:
act impartially,
preserve constitutional stability,
avoid political bias,
and ensure that majority is tested democratically.
The Governor is not expected to become:
a political negotiator,
a party strategist,
or a parallel centre of power.
Final takeaway
A hung assembly is not just a political situation.
It is actually a test of:
constitutional morality,
parliamentary democracy,
federalism,
judicial oversight,
and the limits of discretionary power.
And ultimately, Indian constitutional practice has moved towards one consistent principle:
Governments are formed through constitutional process.
But their legitimacy is proven only on the floor of the House.