jbp123/hello · Datasets at Hugging Face

instruction stringlengths 1 84	input stringlengths 1 85	output stringlengths 1 83
Iyer, Edited by Lokendra Malik, Universal Law	Publishing Co., First Edition, 2013, p. 7.	3h. Rabindra Kr. Pathak, Judicial Process, First Edition,
2019, Thomson Reuters, p. 259.	4. Dr. B.L. Wadehra, Public Interest Litigation: A	Handbook, Second Edition, 2009, Universal Law
Publishing Co., pp. 161–162.	5. Subhash C. Kashyap, “Judiciary Legislature Interface”,	in Politics India, New Delhi, April 1997, p. 22.
5a. Dr. Vandana, Dimensions of Judicial Activism in India,	2016, Raj Publications, New Delhi PP.33–34.	6. Upendra Baxi, “The Avatars of Indian Judicial Activism:
Explorations in the Geographies of [in] Justice” in S.K.	Verma and Kusum (Ed.), Fifty Years of the Supreme	Court of India–Its Grasp and Reach, Indian Law Institute
7. Upendra Baxi, “Judicial Activism: Legal Education and	Research in Globalising India” in Mainstream, New	Delhi, 24 February, 1996, p. 16.
8. Iain McLean and Alistair McMillan, Oxford Concise	Dictionary of Politics, First Indian Edition, 2004, p. 284.	9. Joel B. Grossman and Richard S. Wells (ed),
Constitutional Law and Judicial Policy Making, 1972, pp.	56–57.	10. The Hindu, “Don’t cross limits, apex court asks judges”,
29 Public Interest Litigation	T	he concept of Public Interest Litigation (PIL) originated and
developed in the USA in the 1960s. In the USA, it was	designed to provide legal representation to previously	unrepresented groups and interests. It was undertaken in
recognition of the fact that the ordinary marketplace for legal	services fails to provide such services to significant segments of	the population and to significant interests. Such groups and
interests include the poor, environmentalists, consumers, racial	and ethnic minorities, and others.1	In India, the PIL is a product of the judicial activism role of the
Supreme Court. It was introduced in the early 1980s. Justice V.R.	Krishna Iyer and Justice P.N. Bhagwati were the pioneers of the	concept of PIL.
MEANING OF PIL	The introduction of PIL in India was facilitated by the relaxation of	the traditional rule of ‘locus standi’. According to this rule, only that
person whose rights are infringed alone can move the court for	the remedies, whereas, the PIL is an exception to this traditional	rule. Under the PIL, any public-spirited citizen or a social
organisation can move the court for the enforcement of the rights	of any person or group of persons who because of their poverty or	ignorance or socially or economically disadvantaged position are
themselves unable to approach the court for the remedies. Thus,	in a PIL, any member of the public having ‘sufficient interest’ can	approach the court for enforcing the rights of other persons and
redressal of a common grievance.	The Supreme Court has defined the PIL as “a legal action	initiated in a court of law for the enforcement of public interest or
general interest in which the public or a class of the community	have pecuniary interest or some interest by which their legal rights	or liabilities are affected.”2
PIL is absolutely necessary for maintaining the rule of law,	furthering the cause of justice and accelerating the pace of	realisation of the constitutional objectives. In other words, the real
purposes of PIL are:	(i) vindication of the rule of law,	(ii) facilitating effective access to justice to the socially and
FEATURES OF PIL	The various features of the PIL are explained below:	1. PIL is a strategic arm of the legal aid movement and is
intended to bring justice within the reach of the poor masses,	who constitute the low visibility area of humanity.	2. PIL is a totally different kind of litigation from the ordinary
traditional litigation which is essentially of an adversary	character where there is a dispute between two litigating	parties, one making claims seeking relief against the other
and that other opposing such claim or resisting such relief.	3. PIL is brought before the Court not for the purpose of	enforcing the right of one individual against another as
happens in the case of ordinary litigation, but it is intended to	promote and vindicate public interest.	4. PIL demands that violations of constitutional and legal rights
of large numbers of people who are poor, ignorant or in a	socially or economically disadvantaged position should not	go unnoticed and unredressed.
5. PIL is essentially a co-operative effort on the part of the	petitioner, the State or Public Authority, and the Court to	secure observance of the constitutional or legal rights,
benefits and privileges conferred upon the vulnerable	sections of the community and to reach social justice to	them.
6. In PIL, litigation is undertaken for the purpose of redressing	public injury, enforcing public duty, protecting social,	collective, diffused rights and interests or vindicating public
interest.	7. In PIL, the role held by the Court is more assertive than in	traditional actions; it is creative rather than passive and it
assumes a more positive attitude in determining acts.	8. Though in PIL court enjoys a degree of flexibility unknown to	the trial of traditional private law litigations, whatever the
SCOPE OF PIL	In 1998, the Supreme Court formulated a set of guidelines to be	followed for entertaining letters or petitions received by it as PIL.
These guidelines were modified in 1993 and 2003. According to	them, the letters or petitions falling under the following categories	alone will ordinarily be entertained as PIL:
1. Bonded labour matters	2. Neglected children	3. Non-payment of minimum wages to workers and exploitation
of casual workers and complaints of violation of Labour	Laws (except in individual cases)	4. Petitions from jails complaining of harassment, for pre-
mature release and seeking release after having completed	14 years in jail, death in jail, transfer, release on personal	bond, speedy trial as a fundamental right
5. Petitions against police for refusing to register a case,	harassment by police and death in police custody	6. Petitions against atrocities on women, in particular
harassment of bride, brideburning, rape, murder, kidnapping,	etc.	7. Petitions complaining of harassment or torture of villagers by
co-villagers or by police from persons belonging to	Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes and economically	backward classes
8. Petitions pertaining to environmental pollution, disturbance	of ecological balance, drugs, food adulteration, maintenance	of heritage and culture, antiques, forest and wild life and
other matters of public importance	9. Petitions from riot-victims	10. Family pension
The cases falling under the following categories will not be	entertained as PIL:	1. Landlord-tenant matters
2. Service matter and those pertaining to pension and gratuity	3. Complaints against Central/ State Government departments	and Local Bodies except those relating to item numbers (1)
to (10) above	4. Admission to medical and other educational institution	5. Petitions for early hearing of cases pending in High Courts
PRINCIPLES OF PIL	The Supreme Court evolved the following principles in regard to	PIL3 :
1. The Court in exercise of powers under Articles 32 and 226	of the Constitution can entertain a petition filed by any	interested person in the welfare of the people who are in a
disadvantaged position and thus not in a position to knock	the doors of the Court. The Court is constitutionally bound to	protect the Fundamental Rights of such disadvantaged
people and direct the State to fulfil its constitutional	promises.	2. When the issues of public importance, enforcement of the
fundamental rights of large number of people vis-a-vis the	constitutional duties and functions of the State are raised,	the court treat a letter or a telegram as a PIL. In such cases,
the court relaxes the procedural laws and also the law	relating to pleadings.	3. Whenever injustice is meted out to a large number of
people, the court will not hesitate to step in to invoke Articles	14 and 21 of the Constitution of India as well as the	International Conventions on Human Rights which provide
for a reasonable and fair trial.	4. The common rule of locus standi is relaxed so as to enable	the court to look into the grievances complained on behalf of
the poor, deprived, illiterate and the disabled who cannot	vindicate the legal wrong or legal injury caused to them for	violation of any constitutional or legal right.
5. When the Court is prima facie satisfied about violation of any	constitutional right of a group of people belonging to the	disadvantaged category, it may not allow the State or the
Government from raising the question as to the	maintainability of the petition.	6. Although procedural laws apply on PIL cases, the question
as to whether the principles of res judicata4 or principles	analogous thereto would apply depend on the nature of the	petition and also facts and circumstances of the case.
7. The dispute between two warring groups purely in the realm	of private law would not be allowed to be agitated as a PIL.	8. However, in an appropriate case, although the petitioner
might have moved a Court in his private interest and for	redressal of the personal grievances, the Court in	furtherance of the public interest may treat it necessary to
enquire into the state of affairs of the subject of litigation in	the interest of justice.	9. The Court in special situations may appoint Commission or
other bodies for the purpose of investigating into the	allegations and finding out facts. It may also direct	management of a public institution taken over by such
Commission.	10. The Court will not ordinarily transgress into a policy. It shall	also take utmost care not to transgress its jurisdiction while
purporting to protect the rights of the people from being	violated.	11. The Court would ordinarily not step out of the known areas
of judicial review. The High Court although may pass an	order for doing complete justice to the parties, it does not	have a power akin to Article 142 of the Constitution of India.
12. Ordinarily the High Court should not entertain a writ petition	by way of PIL questioning constitutionality or validity of a	statute or a statutory rule.
GUIDELINES FOR ADMITTING PIL	The PIL has now come to occupy an important field in the	administration of law. It should not be allowed to become ‘Publicity
Interest Litigation’ or ‘Politics Interest Litigation’ or ‘Private Interest	Litigation’ or ‘Paisa Interest Litigation’ or ‘Middle-class Interest	Litigation’ (MIL).
The Supreme Court, in this context, observed: “PIL is not a pill	or a panacea for all wrongs. It was essentially meant to protect	basic human rights of the weak and the disadvantaged and was a
procedure which was innovated where a public-spirited person	files a petition in effect on behalf of such persons who on account	of poverty, helplessness or economic and social disabilities could
not approach the court for relief. There have been, in recent times	increasingly instances of abuse of PIL. Therefore, there is a need	to re-emphasise the parameters within which PIL can be resorted
to by a petitioner and entertained by the court.”5	Therefore, the Supreme Court laid down the following	guidelines for checking the misuse of the PIL6 :
1. The court must encourage genuine and bona fide PIL and	effectively discourage and curb the PIL field for extraneous	considerations.
2. Instead of every individual Judge devising his own	procedure for dealing with PIL, it would be appropriate for	each High Court to properly formulate rules for encouraging
the genuine PIL filed and discouraging PIL filed with oblique	motives.	3. The Court should prima facie verify the credentials of the
petitioner before entertaining the PIL.	4. The Court shall be prima facie satisfied regarding the	correctness of the contents of petition before entertaining the
PIL.	5. The Court should be fully satisfied that substantial public	interest is involved before entertaining the petition.
6. The Court should ensure that the petition which involves	larger public interest, gravity and urgency must be given	priority over other petitions.
7. The Court before entertaining the PIL must ensure that the	PIL is aimed at redressal of genuine public harm and public	injury. The Court should also ensure that there is no
personal gain, private motive or oblique motive behind filing	PIL.	8. The Court should also ensure that the petition filed by
busybodies for extraneous and ulterior motives must be	discouraged by imposing exemplary costs or adopting	similar novel methods to curb frivolous petitions and the
petitions filed for extraneous considerations.	NOTES AND REFERENCES	1. Balancing the Scales of Justice - Financing Public
Interest Law in America (A Report by the Council for	Public Interest Law) 1976, pp. 6–7.	2. Janata Dal v. H.S. Chowdhary, 1992.
3. Guruvayur Devaswom Managing Committee v. C.K.	Rajan, 2003.	4. The principle that when a matter has been finally
adjudicated upon by a court of competent jurisdiction it	may not be reopened or challenged by the original	parties or their successors in interest. Its justification is
the need for finality in litigation. Oxford Dictionary of	Law, Eighth Edition, 2015, p. 537.	5. BALCO Employees Union v. Union of India, 2002.
PART-IV	STATE GOVERNMENT	30. Governor
31. Chief Minister	32. State Council of Ministers	33. State Legislature
34. High Court	35. Tribunals	36. Subordinate Courts
30 Governor	T	he Constitution of India envisages the same pattern of government
in the states as that for the Centre, that is, a parliamentary system.	Part VI of the Constitution deals with the government in the states.	Articles 153 to 167 in Part VI of the Constitution deal with the state
executive. The state executive consists of the governor, the chief minister,	the council of ministers and the advocate general of the state. Thus, there	is no office of vice-governor (in the state) like that of Vice-President at the
Centre.	The governor is the chief executive head of the state. But, like the	president, he is a nominal executive head (titular or constitutional head).
The governor also acts as an agent of the central government. Therefore,	the office of governor has a dual role.	Usually, there is a governor for each state, but the 7th Constitutional
APPOINTMENT OF GOVERNOR	The governor is neither directly elected by the people nor indirectly	elected by a specially constituted electoral college as is the case with the
president. He is appointed by the president by warrant under his hand and	seal. In a way, he is a nominee of the Central government. But, as held by	the Supreme Court in 1979, the office of governor of a state is not an
employment under the Central government. It is an independent	constitutional office and is not under the control of or subordinate to the	Central government.
The Draft Constitution provided for the direct election of the governor	on the basis of universal adult suffrage. But the Constituent Assembly	opted for the present system of appointment of governor by the president
because of the following reasons1 :	1. The direct election of the governor is incompatible with the	parliamentary system established in the states.
2. The mode of direct election is more likely to create conflicts between	the governor and the chief minister.	3. The governor being only a constitutional (nominal) head, there is no
point in making elaborate arrangements for his election and	spending huge amount of money.	4. The election of a governor would be entirely on personal issues.

Iyer, Edited by Lokendra Malik, Universal Law

Publishing Co., First Edition, 2013, p. 7.

3h. Rabindra Kr. Pathak, Judicial Process, First Edition,

2019, Thomson Reuters, p. 259.

4. Dr. B.L. Wadehra, Public Interest Litigation: A

Handbook, Second Edition, 2009, Universal Law

Publishing Co., pp. 161–162.

5. Subhash C. Kashyap, “Judiciary Legislature Interface”,

in Politics India, New Delhi, April 1997, p. 22.

5a. Dr. Vandana, Dimensions of Judicial Activism in India,

2016, Raj Publications, New Delhi PP.33–34.

6. Upendra Baxi, “The Avatars of Indian Judicial Activism:

Explorations in the Geographies of [in] Justice” in S.K.

Verma and Kusum (Ed.), Fifty Years of the Supreme

Court of India–Its Grasp and Reach, Indian Law Institute

7. Upendra Baxi, “Judicial Activism: Legal Education and

Research in Globalising India” in Mainstream, New

Delhi, 24 February, 1996, p. 16.

8. Iain McLean and Alistair McMillan, Oxford Concise

Dictionary of Politics, First Indian Edition, 2004, p. 284.

9. Joel B. Grossman and Richard S. Wells (ed),

Constitutional Law and Judicial Policy Making, 1972, pp.

56–57.

10. The Hindu, “Don’t cross limits, apex court asks judges”,

29 Public Interest Litigation

T

he concept of Public Interest Litigation (PIL) originated and

developed in the USA in the 1960s. In the USA, it was

designed to provide legal representation to previously

unrepresented groups and interests. It was undertaken in

recognition of the fact that the ordinary marketplace for legal

services fails to provide such services to significant segments of

the population and to significant interests. Such groups and

interests include the poor, environmentalists, consumers, racial

and ethnic minorities, and others.1

In India, the PIL is a product of the judicial activism role of the

Supreme Court. It was introduced in the early 1980s. Justice V.R.

Krishna Iyer and Justice P.N. Bhagwati were the pioneers of the

concept of PIL.

MEANING OF PIL

The introduction of PIL in India was facilitated by the relaxation of

the traditional rule of ‘locus standi’. According to this rule, only that

person whose rights are infringed alone can move the court for

the remedies, whereas, the PIL is an exception to this traditional

rule. Under the PIL, any public-spirited citizen or a social

organisation can move the court for the enforcement of the rights

of any person or group of persons who because of their poverty or

ignorance or socially or economically disadvantaged position are

themselves unable to approach the court for the remedies. Thus,

in a PIL, any member of the public having ‘sufficient interest’ can

approach the court for enforcing the rights of other persons and

redressal of a common grievance.

The Supreme Court has defined the PIL as “a legal action

initiated in a court of law for the enforcement of public interest or

general interest in which the public or a class of the community

have pecuniary interest or some interest by which their legal rights

or liabilities are affected.”2

PIL is absolutely necessary for maintaining the rule of law,

furthering the cause of justice and accelerating the pace of

realisation of the constitutional objectives. In other words, the real

purposes of PIL are:

(i) vindication of the rule of law,

(ii) facilitating effective access to justice to the socially and

FEATURES OF PIL

The various features of the PIL are explained below:

1. PIL is a strategic arm of the legal aid movement and is

intended to bring justice within the reach of the poor masses,

who constitute the low visibility area of humanity.

2. PIL is a totally different kind of litigation from the ordinary

traditional litigation which is essentially of an adversary

character where there is a dispute between two litigating

parties, one making claims seeking relief against the other

and that other opposing such claim or resisting such relief.

3. PIL is brought before the Court not for the purpose of

enforcing the right of one individual against another as

happens in the case of ordinary litigation, but it is intended to

promote and vindicate public interest.

4. PIL demands that violations of constitutional and legal rights

of large numbers of people who are poor, ignorant or in a

socially or economically disadvantaged position should not

go unnoticed and unredressed.

5. PIL is essentially a co-operative effort on the part of the

petitioner, the State or Public Authority, and the Court to

secure observance of the constitutional or legal rights,

benefits and privileges conferred upon the vulnerable

sections of the community and to reach social justice to

them.

6. In PIL, litigation is undertaken for the purpose of redressing

public injury, enforcing public duty, protecting social,

collective, diffused rights and interests or vindicating public

interest.

7. In PIL, the role held by the Court is more assertive than in

traditional actions; it is creative rather than passive and it

assumes a more positive attitude in determining acts.

8. Though in PIL court enjoys a degree of flexibility unknown to

the trial of traditional private law litigations, whatever the

SCOPE OF PIL

In 1998, the Supreme Court formulated a set of guidelines to be

followed for entertaining letters or petitions received by it as PIL.

These guidelines were modified in 1993 and 2003. According to

them, the letters or petitions falling under the following categories

alone will ordinarily be entertained as PIL:

1. Bonded labour matters

2. Neglected children

3. Non-payment of minimum wages to workers and exploitation

of casual workers and complaints of violation of Labour

Laws (except in individual cases)

4. Petitions from jails complaining of harassment, for pre-

mature release and seeking release after having completed

14 years in jail, death in jail, transfer, release on personal

bond, speedy trial as a fundamental right

5. Petitions against police for refusing to register a case,

harassment by police and death in police custody

6. Petitions against atrocities on women, in particular

harassment of bride, brideburning, rape, murder, kidnapping,

etc.

7. Petitions complaining of harassment or torture of villagers by

co-villagers or by police from persons belonging to

Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes and economically

backward classes

8. Petitions pertaining to environmental pollution, disturbance

of ecological balance, drugs, food adulteration, maintenance

of heritage and culture, antiques, forest and wild life and

other matters of public importance

9. Petitions from riot-victims

10. Family pension

The cases falling under the following categories will not be

entertained as PIL:

1. Landlord-tenant matters

2. Service matter and those pertaining to pension and gratuity

3. Complaints against Central/ State Government departments

and Local Bodies except those relating to item numbers (1)

to (10) above

4. Admission to medical and other educational institution

5. Petitions for early hearing of cases pending in High Courts

PRINCIPLES OF PIL

The Supreme Court evolved the following principles in regard to

PIL3 :

1. The Court in exercise of powers under Articles 32 and 226

of the Constitution can entertain a petition filed by any

interested person in the welfare of the people who are in a

disadvantaged position and thus not in a position to knock

the doors of the Court. The Court is constitutionally bound to

protect the Fundamental Rights of such disadvantaged

people and direct the State to fulfil its constitutional

promises.

2. When the issues of public importance, enforcement of the

fundamental rights of large number of people vis-a-vis the

constitutional duties and functions of the State are raised,

the court treat a letter or a telegram as a PIL. In such cases,

the court relaxes the procedural laws and also the law

relating to pleadings.

3. Whenever injustice is meted out to a large number of

people, the court will not hesitate to step in to invoke Articles

14 and 21 of the Constitution of India as well as the

International Conventions on Human Rights which provide

for a reasonable and fair trial.

4. The common rule of locus standi is relaxed so as to enable

the court to look into the grievances complained on behalf of

the poor, deprived, illiterate and the disabled who cannot

vindicate the legal wrong or legal injury caused to them for

violation of any constitutional or legal right.

5. When the Court is prima facie satisfied about violation of any

constitutional right of a group of people belonging to the

disadvantaged category, it may not allow the State or the

Government from raising the question as to the

maintainability of the petition.

6. Although procedural laws apply on PIL cases, the question

as to whether the principles of res judicata4 or principles

analogous thereto would apply depend on the nature of the

petition and also facts and circumstances of the case.

7. The dispute between two warring groups purely in the realm

of private law would not be allowed to be agitated as a PIL.

8. However, in an appropriate case, although the petitioner

might have moved a Court in his private interest and for

redressal of the personal grievances, the Court in

furtherance of the public interest may treat it necessary to

enquire into the state of affairs of the subject of litigation in

the interest of justice.

9. The Court in special situations may appoint Commission or

other bodies for the purpose of investigating into the

allegations and finding out facts. It may also direct

management of a public institution taken over by such

Commission.

10. The Court will not ordinarily transgress into a policy. It shall

also take utmost care not to transgress its jurisdiction while

purporting to protect the rights of the people from being

violated.

11. The Court would ordinarily not step out of the known areas

of judicial review. The High Court although may pass an

order for doing complete justice to the parties, it does not

have a power akin to Article 142 of the Constitution of India.

12. Ordinarily the High Court should not entertain a writ petition

by way of PIL questioning constitutionality or validity of a

statute or a statutory rule.

GUIDELINES FOR ADMITTING PIL

The PIL has now come to occupy an important field in the

administration of law. It should not be allowed to become ‘Publicity

Interest Litigation’ or ‘Politics Interest Litigation’ or ‘Private Interest

Litigation’ or ‘Paisa Interest Litigation’ or ‘Middle-class Interest

Litigation’ (MIL).

The Supreme Court, in this context, observed: “PIL is not a pill

or a panacea for all wrongs. It was essentially meant to protect

basic human rights of the weak and the disadvantaged and was a

procedure which was innovated where a public-spirited person

files a petition in effect on behalf of such persons who on account

of poverty, helplessness or economic and social disabilities could

not approach the court for relief. There have been, in recent times

increasingly instances of abuse of PIL. Therefore, there is a need

to re-emphasise the parameters within which PIL can be resorted

to by a petitioner and entertained by the court.”5

Therefore, the Supreme Court laid down the following

guidelines for checking the misuse of the PIL6 :

1. The court must encourage genuine and bona fide PIL and

effectively discourage and curb the PIL field for extraneous

considerations.

2. Instead of every individual Judge devising his own

procedure for dealing with PIL, it would be appropriate for

each High Court to properly formulate rules for encouraging

the genuine PIL filed and discouraging PIL filed with oblique

motives.

3. The Court should prima facie verify the credentials of the

petitioner before entertaining the PIL.

4. The Court shall be prima facie satisfied regarding the

correctness of the contents of petition before entertaining the

PIL.

5. The Court should be fully satisfied that substantial public

interest is involved before entertaining the petition.

6. The Court should ensure that the petition which involves

larger public interest, gravity and urgency must be given

priority over other petitions.

7. The Court before entertaining the PIL must ensure that the

PIL is aimed at redressal of genuine public harm and public

injury. The Court should also ensure that there is no

personal gain, private motive or oblique motive behind filing

PIL.

8. The Court should also ensure that the petition filed by

busybodies for extraneous and ulterior motives must be

discouraged by imposing exemplary costs or adopting

similar novel methods to curb frivolous petitions and the

petitions filed for extraneous considerations.

NOTES AND REFERENCES

1. Balancing the Scales of Justice - Financing Public

Interest Law in America (A Report by the Council for

Public Interest Law) 1976, pp. 6–7.

2. Janata Dal v. H.S. Chowdhary, 1992.

3. Guruvayur Devaswom Managing Committee v. C.K.

Rajan, 2003.

4. The principle that when a matter has been finally

adjudicated upon by a court of competent jurisdiction it

may not be reopened or challenged by the original

parties or their successors in interest. Its justification is

the need for finality in litigation. Oxford Dictionary of

Law, Eighth Edition, 2015, p. 537.

5. BALCO Employees Union v. Union of India, 2002.

PART-IV

STATE GOVERNMENT

30. Governor

31. Chief Minister

32. State Council of Ministers

33. State Legislature

34. High Court

35. Tribunals

36. Subordinate Courts

30 Governor

T

he Constitution of India envisages the same pattern of government

in the states as that for the Centre, that is, a parliamentary system.

Part VI of the Constitution deals with the government in the states.

Articles 153 to 167 in Part VI of the Constitution deal with the state

executive. The state executive consists of the governor, the chief minister,

the council of ministers and the advocate general of the state. Thus, there

is no office of vice-governor (in the state) like that of Vice-President at the

Centre.

The governor is the chief executive head of the state. But, like the

president, he is a nominal executive head (titular or constitutional head).

The governor also acts as an agent of the central government. Therefore,

the office of governor has a dual role.

Usually, there is a governor for each state, but the 7th Constitutional

APPOINTMENT OF GOVERNOR

The governor is neither directly elected by the people nor indirectly

elected by a specially constituted electoral college as is the case with the

president. He is appointed by the president by warrant under his hand and

seal. In a way, he is a nominee of the Central government. But, as held by

the Supreme Court in 1979, the office of governor of a state is not an

employment under the Central government. It is an independent

constitutional office and is not under the control of or subordinate to the

Central government.

The Draft Constitution provided for the direct election of the governor

on the basis of universal adult suffrage. But the Constituent Assembly

opted for the present system of appointment of governor by the president

because of the following reasons1 :

1. The direct election of the governor is incompatible with the

parliamentary system established in the states.

2. The mode of direct election is more likely to create conflicts between

the governor and the chief minister.

3. The governor being only a constitutional (nominal) head, there is no

point in making elaborate arrangements for his election and

spending huge amount of money.

4. The election of a governor would be entirely on personal issues.