The governor under our constitutional scheme is not an ornamental figure. He has an important role to play. One of his most important roles and delicate responsibilities is the proper maintenance of Centre-state relations, especially with regard to the imposition of President’s rule in a state and the formation of a government. In this connection it is imperative that the governor should explore every possibility of formation of a government in a state before plunging it into the tumult and tribulation of an election. Where a single party commands a majority, the governor is bound to call upon its leader to form the government. In the absence of such a situation, the governor should invite the leader of a party or combination of parties which has the requisite numerical strength and is capable of forming a government. These are the recommendations of the Sarkaria Commission, which have been broadly endorsed by the Supreme Court.

How is the actual situation to be ascertained? Normally by a floor test in the assembly which, according to the Supreme Court in S. Bommai’s case, is the constitutionally ordained democratic method.

Defections are highly objectionable and have been dealt with in the Tenth Schedule to the Constitution and should be stringently curbed. But neither the possibility of defections nor horse-trading, the bane of Indian politics, is a legally permissible ground either for imposing President’s rule or for dissolution of a state assembly. A full bench of the Karnataka high court relied upon horse-trading, which was mentioned in the governor’s report to justify President’s rule, dismissal of Bommai’s government and dissolution of the assembly in Karnataka. The Supreme Court in its judgment in S. Bommai disagreed and overruled the high court.

... contd.