Nominated Members in Legislatures

Home » Nominated Members in Legislatures

Parliament: 12 nominated members in Rajya Sabha (by President on aid & advice of Union Council of Ministers).
- State Assemblies: Earlier, Governors nominated one Anglo-Indian MLA (now abolished in 2020).
- Legislative Councils: Nearly 1/6th of members are nominated by Governors (on advice of State Council of Ministers).
Principle:
- Nomination exists to bring in experts, minority/community representation, or to supplement elected members.
- But always on aid & advice of elected executive, ensuring accountability.

Relevance : GS 2(Polity and Constitution)

Delhi (GNCTD Act, 1991):
- 70 elected MLAs, no nominated members.
Puducherry (Government of UT Act, 1963):
- 30 elected MLAs + up to 3 nominated by Union government.
- Controversy: Union govt nominates directly, bypassing UT Council of Ministers.
J&K (J&K Reorganisation Act, 2019, amended 2023):
- 90 elected seats.
- LG may nominate up to 5 members:
  - 2 women,
  - 2 Kashmiri migrants,
  - 1 displaced person from Pakistan-occupied Kashmir.

Puducherry (K. Lakshminarayanan v. Union of India, 2018 – Madras HC):
- Held: Union govt can nominate 3 MLAs to Puducherry Assembly without UT Cabinet advice.
- Recommended statutory clarity, but Supreme Court later set aside these recommendations.
Delhi (GNCTD v. Union of India, 2023 – SC Constitution Bench):
- Introduced “Triple Chain of Command” principle:
  - Civil servants accountable to Ministers.
  - Ministers accountable to Legislature.
  - Legislature accountable to People.
- Ensures democratic accountability → LG bound by aid & advice of Council of Ministers (except in subjects outside Delhi Assembly’s legislative domain).
- Though about services, rationale extends to nominations: LG should act with Cabinet’s advice to maintain democratic chain.

Union Home Ministry’s stand (2024 affidavit):
- LG can nominate 5 members without aid & advice of J&K Council of Ministers.
Democratic Concerns:
- Risks undermining popular mandate, especially in a small Assembly (90 elected).
- Nominated MLAs can swing majority/minority balance → undemocratic if done by Union govt/ LG alone.

Federal Balance:
- UTs with Assemblies (Delhi, Puducherry, J&K) are hybrid — not full States, but with elected governments.
- Direct Union control via LG nominations risks weakening local democracy.
Political Neutrality:
- When ruling party at Centre ≠ ruling party in UT, nomination power can be weaponised to influence Assembly outcomes.
J&K’s Special Case:
- Was a State till 2019, with even greater autonomy.
- SC upheld reorganisation, but Govt assured early restoration of statehood.
- Therefore, democratic principles must be safeguarded → LG should nominate only on Cabinet advice.

For J&K Assembly:
- LG should exercise power only on aid & advice of UT Council of Ministers (once elected).
- Aligns with SC’s triple chain of command principle.
- Prevents manipulation of Assembly arithmetic.
For Puducherry Assembly (Govt of UT Act, 1963):
- Parliament should amend law to mandate that Union govt/ LG act on UT Cabinet’s advice.
- Brings practice in line with democratic accountability.
For All UTs with Assemblies:
- Clear statutory framework on:
  - Who nominates,
  - On whose advice,
  - Criteria for nomination (minorities, women, expertise).
- Prevents arbitrary use of nomination powers.

Who decides nominations? → Constitutionally, nominations are made by President/Governors/LGs, but always on aid & advice of elected governments (except where law explicitly allows Centre’s discretion).
J&K Assembly nominations should be by LG on advice of Council of Ministers, to preserve democracy.
Puducherry (1963 Act) allows Union govt direct nomination (problematic).
SC’s 2023 “Triple Chain of Command” principle reinforces that unelected authorities (LG, Union govt) should not bypass elected executives in democratic functioning.