<p>The conduct of Governors with respect to the elected governments of their states has often invited controversies. Such conduct has tended to be downright political and partisan, particularly in times of government formation after elections or when an existing government’s majority is challenged. Governors have tried to protect state governments that are aligned with the Centre and sought to support attempts to topple governments of parties that are not friendly with the Centre. This happened during the recent change of government in Maharashtra, too, when the MVA government of Uddhav Thackeray was toppled by a combination of Shiv Sena rebels, led by Eknath Shinde, and the BJP. Governor Bhagat Singh Koshyari’s decisions were blatantly partisan and aided the rebels in crucial ways on important occasions. Two of them stand out. </p>.<p>The first was the Governor’s decision to convene the Assembly for a floor test to be held on June 29, within 24 hours of the rebels’ decision to withdraw support to the government was conveyed to him. This was even after the Supreme Court, while considering the rebels’ petition against Deputy Speaker Narahari Zirwal’s June 25 disqualification notices to them, had said that the status quo should continue. The rebels had pleaded that the Deputy Speaker could not act on disqualifications when a notice for his removal was pending. The court had said it would hear the rebels’ and others’ petitions on July 11 and had hoped that they would not become infructuous by then. The Governor convened the House while the petitions were pending before the court, and the outcome of his decision changed the situation. The Governor’s move was wrong and improper, and was meant to aid the rebels as it short-circuited the disqualification issue. </p>.<p>The second decision was about the election of the Speaker of the Assembly. The Governor allowed the election of the BJP’s Rahul Narvekar as Speaker, though he had refused to fix a date for the Speaker’s election in the past. Though the Governor has no power or discretion to fix a date for the Speaker’s election on his own and has to abide by the advice of the Council of Ministers on the matter, the refusal was on the ground that there was a case in the Supreme Court about the procedure for the election. But as soon as the BJP-Sena rebels combine government was formed, the Governor swallowed his own past objections, fixed the date and facilitated the Speaker’s election as the new government needed a Speaker to conduct the proceedings for the floor test in the House. He abused his constitutional position and powers to favour the BJP-Sena rebels’ combine, and has aggravated the legal and<br />constitutional issues that are yet to be settled by the Supreme Court. </p>
<p>The conduct of Governors with respect to the elected governments of their states has often invited controversies. Such conduct has tended to be downright political and partisan, particularly in times of government formation after elections or when an existing government’s majority is challenged. Governors have tried to protect state governments that are aligned with the Centre and sought to support attempts to topple governments of parties that are not friendly with the Centre. This happened during the recent change of government in Maharashtra, too, when the MVA government of Uddhav Thackeray was toppled by a combination of Shiv Sena rebels, led by Eknath Shinde, and the BJP. Governor Bhagat Singh Koshyari’s decisions were blatantly partisan and aided the rebels in crucial ways on important occasions. Two of them stand out. </p>.<p>The first was the Governor’s decision to convene the Assembly for a floor test to be held on June 29, within 24 hours of the rebels’ decision to withdraw support to the government was conveyed to him. This was even after the Supreme Court, while considering the rebels’ petition against Deputy Speaker Narahari Zirwal’s June 25 disqualification notices to them, had said that the status quo should continue. The rebels had pleaded that the Deputy Speaker could not act on disqualifications when a notice for his removal was pending. The court had said it would hear the rebels’ and others’ petitions on July 11 and had hoped that they would not become infructuous by then. The Governor convened the House while the petitions were pending before the court, and the outcome of his decision changed the situation. The Governor’s move was wrong and improper, and was meant to aid the rebels as it short-circuited the disqualification issue. </p>.<p>The second decision was about the election of the Speaker of the Assembly. The Governor allowed the election of the BJP’s Rahul Narvekar as Speaker, though he had refused to fix a date for the Speaker’s election in the past. Though the Governor has no power or discretion to fix a date for the Speaker’s election on his own and has to abide by the advice of the Council of Ministers on the matter, the refusal was on the ground that there was a case in the Supreme Court about the procedure for the election. But as soon as the BJP-Sena rebels combine government was formed, the Governor swallowed his own past objections, fixed the date and facilitated the Speaker’s election as the new government needed a Speaker to conduct the proceedings for the floor test in the House. He abused his constitutional position and powers to favour the BJP-Sena rebels’ combine, and has aggravated the legal and<br />constitutional issues that are yet to be settled by the Supreme Court. </p>
