For this article:

6 Feb 2026·Source: The Hindu
4 min
Polity & GovernanceEDITORIAL

Governor's Address: Should the Practice Be Scrapped?

Experts debate the necessity of Governor's address in state legislatures.

Editorial Analysis

P.D.T. Achary argues that a Governor's refusal to read the Cabinet-approved address violates Article 176. Alok Prasanna Kumar emphasizes the Governor's duty to facilitate the legislature's function.

Main Arguments:

  1. Under Article 176, a Governor is constitutionally mandated to address the State legislature.
  2. The Governor is an integral part of the State legislature and is expected to facilitate its functioning.
  3. The Governor cannot alter the address prepared by the State Cabinet.
  4. Presidential intervention is necessary when Governors fail to discharge their constitutional duties.

Counter Arguments:

  1. The practice of Governors addressing the State legislatures is a colonial remnant that ought to be dispensed with.
  2. A constitutional amendment to do away with the Governor's address is feasible.

Conclusion

The debate centers on whether the practice of Governors addressing State legislatures should be scrapped, given recent incidents of Governors refusing to read the Cabinet-approved address. While some argue for its retention to maintain constitutional continuity, others suggest reconsideration due to concerns about partisan conduct by Governors.

Policy Implications

The article discusses the potential need for constitutional amendments or reforms to address the issues arising from Governors refusing to deliver the address, including reconsidering the manner in which Governors are appointed and removed.

The article discusses whether the practice of Governors addressing State legislatures should be scrapped, given recent incidents of Governors refusing to read the Cabinet-approved address. P.D.T. Achary and Alok Prasanna Kumar debate the issue, highlighting constitutional mandates, the Governor's role, and potential remedies.

Achary argues that a Governor's refusal violates Article 176, while Kumar emphasizes the Governor's duty to facilitate the legislature's function. They discuss the Governor's discretion, the role of the President, and the feasibility of constitutional amendments. Achary suggests Presidential intervention is necessary when Governors fail to discharge duties.

Kumar proposes reconsidering the appointment and removal process of Governors to ensure their allegiance to the Constitution.

Key Facts

1.

Governor Thaawarchand Gehlot walked out of the Karnataka Legislature after reading only a few lines of his address.

2.

In Tamil Nadu, Governor R.N. Ravi walked out of the Assembly without delivering his inaugural address.

3.

In Kerala, Governor Rajendra Vishwanath Arlekar omitted portions of the speech cleared by the Cabinet.

4.

The Governor's address is prepared by the State Cabinet.

5.

The Governor cannot alter the address prepared by the State Cabinet.

6.

The President can issue directions for the discharge of a Governor’s functions under Article 160 of the Constitution.

UPSC Exam Angles

1.

GS Paper II: Functions and responsibilities of the Union and the States, issues and challenges pertaining to the federal structure

2.

Connects to the syllabus on Centre-State relations, constitutional bodies, and parliamentary procedures

3.

Potential question types: Statement-based MCQs, analytical questions on the role of the Governor

More Information

Background

The role of the Governor in India is rooted in the Government of India Act, 1935, which provided for a Governor in each province. After independence, the Constituent Assembly debated the method of appointing Governors, ultimately opting for appointment by the President, as outlined in Article 155 of the Constitution. This decision reflected a desire to balance provincial autonomy with central oversight. Over time, the Governor's role has been subject to scrutiny and debate, particularly concerning the exercise of discretionary powers. The Sarkaria Commission (1983-1988) and the Punchhi Commission (2007-2010) were set up to review Centre-State relations, including the role of the Governor. These commissions made recommendations to ensure the Governor's office remains impartial and non-partisan. The constitutional framework governing the Governor's functions includes several key articles. Article 163 deals with the Governor's discretion, while Article 176 mandates the Governor's address to the Legislative Assembly. These provisions, along with Articles related to the Governor's appointment (Article 155) and removal, define the scope and limitations of the Governor's authority.

Latest Developments

Recent incidents of Governors refusing to read the Cabinet-approved address have reignited debates about the neutrality and constitutional obligations of the office. This has led to calls for revisiting the process of appointing Governors and defining their discretionary powers more clearly. The role of the President in such situations is also being questioned, particularly regarding the extent of intervention permissible when a Governor appears to be acting in contravention of the Constitution. Several legal and constitutional experts have weighed in on the matter, offering different interpretations of the relevant articles. Some argue that the Governor's refusal to deliver the address is a violation of Article 176, while others emphasize the Governor's duty to uphold the Constitution, even if it means disagreeing with the state government. The debate also touches upon the principles of federalism and the balance of power between the Centre and the states. Looking ahead, potential remedies include seeking Presidential intervention, initiating impeachment proceedings against the Governor, or pursuing constitutional amendments to clarify the Governor's role and responsibilities. The feasibility and desirability of each of these options are currently being discussed in legal and political circles. Any reform in this area would likely require a broad consensus among political parties and a careful consideration of the implications for Centre-State relations.

Practice Questions (MCQs)

1. Consider the following statements regarding the Governor's address to the State Legislature: 1. Article 176 of the Constitution mandates the Governor to address the Legislative Assembly. 2. The Governor's address is prepared by the Cabinet of the State. 3. The Governor can refuse to read the Cabinet-approved address if they disagree with its contents. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

  • A.1 and 2 only
  • B.2 and 3 only
  • C.1 and 3 only
  • D.1, 2 and 3
Show Answer

Answer: A

Statement 1 is CORRECT: Article 176 of the Constitution does mandate the Governor to address the Legislative Assembly. Statement 2 is CORRECT: The Governor's address is indeed prepared by the Cabinet of the State. Statement 3 is INCORRECT: According to P.D.T. Achary, a Governor's refusal violates Article 176. Alok Prasanna Kumar emphasizes the Governor's duty to facilitate the legislature's function.

Source Articles

Should the Governor’s address be scrapped? - The Hindu

The Hindu·6 Feb 2026

In Focus podcast | Should the Governor’s address be scrapped? - The Hindu

The Hindu·6 Feb 2026

Meaningless formality: On Governors, their actions - The Hindu

The Hindu·6 Feb 2026

Rescuing grace from disgrace: If parties agree that the Head of State need read out the bare outline of the legislative business then the address will belong to neither its drafter nor its reader but to its rightful owner, the listener - The Hindu

The Hindu·6 Feb 2026

Why R. Venkataraman was against the system of address by President and Governors to legislature - The Hindu

The Hindu·6 Feb 2026

GKSolverToday's News