Content
- Governor’s Constitutional Duties & Address to Legislature
- Dilution of Environmental Justice in India
Governor’s Constitutional Duties & Address to Legislature
Constitutional Position of Governor
Nature of Office
- Governor is constitutional head of State; though executive power is formally vested in Governor, it is exercised on aid and advice of Council of Ministers (Articles 163–164) in a parliamentary system.
- Article 168 makes Governor part of State Legislature along with Assembly/Council, showing role is institutionally embedded in law-making process, not merely ceremonial symbolism.
- Governor is expected to act as neutral constitutional sentinel, preserving federal balance, constitutional morality, and democratic mandate rather than acting as political agent of Union government.
Relevance
GS-2 (Polity):
- Governor’s powers, aid-and-advice principle, Articles 163, 168, 175, 176, and limits of discretion.
- Centre–State relations, federalism, constitutional conventions, Punchhi Commission reforms.
Practice Question
- “The Governor is meant to be a constitutional sentinel, not a political actor.”
Examine the constitutional duties of the Governor regarding the legislative address and discuss issues arising from recent controversies. Suggest reforms. (15M)
Duty Regarding Address to Legislature
Article 176 — Special Address
- Article 176 mandates Governor’s address at first session after general election and first session each year, making it a constitutional obligation, not optional political convention.
- Address communicates government’s legislative and policy agenda, drafted exclusively by elected Council of Ministers, reflecting democratic will and collective cabinet responsibility before legislature.
- Refusal to read, truncating, or selectively omitting portions violates spirit of cabinet responsibility, since Governor substitutes personal judgment for elected executive’s policy communication.
Discretion and Limits
Can Governor Alter Speech?
- Governor cannot alter Cabinet-approved text, as address is executive act performed on aid and advice; Governor bears no legal or political responsibility for its contents.
- Supreme Court in Nabam Rebia (2016) held Governor must ordinarily act on aid and advice in legislative matters, limiting discretionary space and reinforcing parliamentary accountability.
- Discretion exists only in rare constitutional situations, not for judging desirability or ideology of government policies contained in legislative address.
Related Constitutional Provisions
Article 175
- Article 175 allows Governor to address or send messages to legislature regarding pending bills, but this is supplementary power and cannot replace mandatory Article 176 special address.
Article 355
- Article 355 obligates Union to ensure State governance aligns with Constitution; persistent gubernatorial deviation from Article 176 raises questions about meaningful discharge of this Union duty.
Article 160
- Article 160 empowers President to make provisions for discharge of Governor’s functions in contingencies, theoretically enabling directions when gubernatorial conduct risks constitutional breakdown.
Accountability Structure
President vs Governor
- President is indirectly elected and removable by impeachment, creating institutional accountability to Parliament, which moderates conduct through constitutional and political checks.
- Governor holds office at pleasure of President (Union government), lacking impeachment process, leading to perception of political dependence and weaker accountability to State Legislature.
- This asymmetry explains why Presidents rarely attract controversy, whereas Governors often face allegations of partisanship in politically contested States.
Federalism and Governance Dimension
Centre–State Relations
- Partisan gubernatorial actions in Opposition-ruled States generate friction, undermine cooperative federalism, and create perception of indirect Union interference in State legislative functioning.
- Delays or disruptions in legislative sessions due to Governor’s conduct can indirectly affect law-making, budget approvals, and democratic governance at State level.
Colonial Legacy Debate
Retain or Remove?
- Supporters argue Governor’s address reflects Westminster parliamentary tradition, symbolising constitutional continuity and formal link between executive policies and legislative scrutiny.
- Critics argue practice is largely ceremonial, non-essential for legislative functioning, and increasingly politicised, thus reconsideration may be justified in modern federal democracy.
Ethical and Normative Dimension
Constitutional Morality
- Constitutional morality requires Governors to prioritise democratic mandate, restraint, and neutrality, even when personal or political preferences differ from elected government’s policies.
- Visible partisanship erodes public trust in constitutional offices and weakens legitimacy of federal institutions designed to be politically neutral.
Challenges and Grey Areas
Practical Concerns
- Constitution does not clearly specify penalties or corrective mechanisms if Governor refuses to deliver address, creating enforcement ambiguity and reliance on conventions.
- Presidential removal of Governor for such conduct is legally possible but politically sensitive, risking accusations of central overreach.
Way Forward
Reform Measures
- Punchhi Commission recommended fixed tenure, consultative appointment, and non-partisan individuals as Governors to strengthen neutrality and federal trust.
- Codified guidelines on gubernatorial conduct can clarify limits of discretion and reduce recurrent constitutional confrontations.
- Strengthening conventions of dialogue between Chief Minister and Governor can resolve disagreements privately, preserving dignity of institutions.
Dilution of Environmental Justice in India
Context and Core Concern
Emerging Trend
- Recent policy and judicial trends indicate systematic dilution of environmental safeguards, where development priorities increasingly override ecological concerns, raising questions about India’s constitutional commitment to environmental protection and intergenerational equity.
- Policy shift allowing EIA without prior site specificity (2025) weakens scientific appraisal, reducing ability to assess cumulative ecological impacts, carrying risks of arbitrary approvals and post-facto regularisation of damage.
Relevance
GS-2 (Polity):
- Article 21, 48A, 51A(g), Article 14 — environmental rights and duties.
- Judiciary’s role in environmental protection.
GS-3 (Environment):
- EIA, precautionary principle, polluter pays, public trust doctrine.
- Aravallis, mangroves, Himalayas — ecology & disaster risks.
Practice Question
- Environmental governance in India is witnessing a shift from precaution to post-facto regularisation.Critically examine in the light of constitutional provisions and recent trends. (15M)
Constitutional Framework
Article 21 — Right to Environment
- Supreme Court has consistently read right to clean and healthy environment into Article 21, making environmental protection integral to right to life, dignity, and public health.
- Diluting environmental safeguards indirectly compromises Article 21 by exposing citizens to pollution, ecological degradation, climate risks, and disaster vulnerability.
Directive Principles
- Article 48A obligates State to protect and improve environment and safeguard forests and wildlife, forming constitutional foundation for environmental governance and policy restraint.
- Weak enforcement or dilution turns Article 48A into symbolic commitment rather than operational constitutional directive guiding state action.
Fundamental Duty
- Article 51A(g) imposes duty on citizens to protect natural environment; however, citizen responsibility becomes ineffective if state policies themselves enable ecological degradation.
Equality and Non-Arbitrariness
- Height-based Aravalli definition creates artificial classification lacking ecological rationale, potentially violating Article 14’s non-arbitrariness and reasonable classification doctrine.
Judicial Dimension
Progressive Jurisprudence (Past)
- In Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum (1996), SC adopted precautionary principle and polluter pays principle, embedding sustainability into Indian environmental jurisprudence.
- M.C. Mehta cases recognised ecological fragility of Aravallis and imposed mining restrictions, showing earlier judicial leadership in conservation.
- Public Trust Doctrine (M.C. Mehta v. Kamal Nath, 1996) held natural resources are held in trust by State for public, limiting privatisation and ecological harm.
Recent Judicial Leniency
- Recall of Vanashakti judgment (2025) and acceptance of post-facto or conditional clearances signal shift from deterrence to accommodation of violations.
- Acceptance of 100-metre Aravalli definition (2025) narrows legal protection, excluding ecologically linked low-altitude ridges critical for hydrology and biodiversity.
- Judicial approvals for mangrove destruction and infrastructure expansion reflect growing reliance on mitigation promises over strict compliance.
Environmental and Scientific Concerns
Aravallis
- Aravallis function as barrier against desertification, groundwater recharge zone, and biodiversity corridor, crucial for north-west India’s climate stability.
- Fragmented or height-centric definitions ignore geomorphological continuity and ecological interdependence, undermining landscape-level conservation.
Mangroves
- Mangroves serve as carbon sinks, flood buffers, and biodiversity nurseries; mature ecosystems require decades to develop, making compensatory afforestation scientifically inadequate.
Himalayas and Char Dham
- Himalayan ecosystems are geologically young and fragile; study identifying 811 landslide zones (2025) highlights disaster risks from large-scale road expansion.
Governance and Procedural Justice
Regulatory Weakening
- EIA dilution, shortened hearings, and checklist-style compliance reduce meaningful public participation and scientific scrutiny in decision-making.
- Procedural shortcuts erode transparency, accountability, and environmental democracy, weakening legitimacy of clearances.
Corporate Influence Concerns
- Perception that large capital-backed projects navigate regulatory barriers easily raises concerns of regulatory capture and unequal application of law, affecting constitutional fairness.
Ethical and Intergenerational Dimension
Intergenerational Equity
- Environmental degradation imposes irreversible costs on future generations, conflicting with principle that present development must not compromise future ecological security.
- Constitutionally implied sustainability requires balancing economic growth with long-term ecological resilience.
Challenges
Structural Issues
- Developmental pressures, fiscal incentives, and political economy of infrastructure create bias toward project approvals over precaution.
- Courts face tension between economic growth imperatives and ecological jurisprudence, leading to inconsistent outcomes.
Way Forward
Reform Measures
- Strengthen independent, science-based EIA regime with cumulative impact assessments and credible public consultations.
- Institutionalise regular Green Benches in SC and HCs for specialised, consistent environmental adjudication.
- Reinforce application of precautionary principle, polluter pays, and public trust doctrine in all ecological matters.
- Promote development models integrating ecological economics, climate resilience, and natural capital accounting.
