January 22, 2026

The Speaker vs The Governor Decoded Federal Conflict, Floor Tests & Article 200

The Speaker vs The Governor Decoded: Federal Conflict, Floor Tests & Article 200 description: "The definitive guide to the constitutional conflict between the Speaker and the Governor. Understand the Nabam Rebia verdict, the Maharashtra Political Crisis, the controversy over Article 200 (Bill Assent), and the Governor's discretionary powers." date: 2026-01-13 author: Civics Desk | Sansad Online tags: [Speaker vs Governor, Article 200, Nabam Rebia Case, Floor Test, Discretionary Powers, Federalism, Article 163, Maharashtra Political Crisis, Tamil Nadu Governor Bill Case, 10th Schedule]

⚔️ Parliament 101: The Speaker vs. The Governor (The Federal Clash)

The Power Struggle

When the Centre's Agent meets the House's Master.

  • The Governor: Appointed by the Centre (President). Represents the Union.
  • The Speaker: Elected by the MLAs. Represents the State.
  • The Flashpoint: Article 174 (Summoning the House) & Article 200 (Signing Bills).
  • The Weapon: Floor Test (Ordering the CM to prove majority).
🏛️ THE CONSTITUTIONAL SILENCE: The Constitution assumes both the Governor and the Speaker will act as neutral umpires. It did not foresee a situation where the Governor acts as an "Agent of the Centre" to topple a state government, or the Speaker acts as a "Partisan Player" to protect a minority government. When these two constitutional high offices clash, the State Assembly becomes a war zone.

Introduction: The "Double Head" Problem

(Why They Fight)

In the British parliamentary system, the head of state (Queen) is ceremonial. In India, the Governor is mostly ceremonial, but the Constitution leaves a backdoor open: "Discretion."

Article 163 says the Governor must act on the advice of the Chief Minister, except where the Constitution requires them to use their discretion. This "Discretion" is the root of all evil.

  • Scenario A: The Chief Minister (CM) wants to pass a law against the Centre's policies. The Speaker passes it. The Governor sits on the Bill for 2 years (Pocket Veto).
  • Scenario B: The CM loses support of 10 MLAs. The Speaker disqualifies them to save the government. The Governor immediately orders a "Floor Test" to topple the government.

Who is supreme? The Speaker (Master of the House) or the Governor (Guardian of the Constitution)? This guide decodes the recent Supreme Court judgments—from the Nabam Rebia case to the Maharashtra Crisis—that have tried to draw the line.

📜 Part 1: Summoning the House (Article 174)

Can the Governor refuse to call a session if the Cabinet asks for it?

The Crisis

Normally, the Governor summons the House on the CM's advice. But what if the Governor "feels" the CM has lost the majority?

  • In Arunachal Pradesh (2016), Governor J.P. Rajkhowa unilaterally advanced the session of the Assembly without the CM's advice, leading to the government's fall.

The Verdict: Nabam Rebia vs Deputy Speaker (2016)

The Supreme Court laid down the "Lakshman Rekha":

  1. Governor has NO independent power to summon, prorogue, or dissolve the House.
  2. They MUST act on the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers.
  3. Exception: The Governor can act independently only if the Government has already lost its majority on the floor of the House.

🗳️ Part 2: The Floor Test Battle (Maharashtra Crisis)

This is the most common weapon used by Governors to topple governments.

The Scenario (2022)

  • The Shiv Sena split. Eknath Shinde took a faction of MLAs to Guwahati.
  • The Governor (Bhagat Singh Koshyari) ordered CM Uddhav Thackeray to face a "Floor Test" (Confidence Vote) immediately.
  • Thackeray resigned, saying the Governor acted like an opposition leader.

The Verdict (2023)

In a historic judgment, the Supreme Court slammed the Governor:

  • Illegal Order: The Court said the Governor had no objective material to doubt the majority. Just because some MLAs are unhappy doesn't mean the government has fallen.
  • Internal Party Matter: The Governor cannot enter a "political thicket" or internal party disputes.
  • The Result: While the Court called the Governor's action illegal, it could not restore Thackeray's government because he had resigned voluntarily instead of facing the test.

🚫 Part 3: Withholding Assent (Article 200)

This is the "Cold War" tactic. Governors in states like Tamil Nadu, Kerala, and Punjab have sat on Bills for years.

The Text of Article 200

When a Bill is sent to the Governor, they have three options:

  1. Assent: Sign it.
  2. Withhold Assent: Reject it (The Bill dies).
  3. Return for Reconsideration: Send it back with comments.
    • Crucial Proviso: If the Assembly passes it again (with or without changes), the Governor MUST sign it.

The Loophole & The Fix (2025 Judgment)

Governors found a fourth option: Do Nothing. They would neither sign nor return the bill, effectively killing it.

  • The Case: State of Tamil Nadu vs Governor RN Ravi.
  • The SC Verdict (April 2025): The Court ruled that "Withholding Assent" is NOT a final veto.
    • If a Governor "Withholds Assent," they MUST send the bill back to the Assembly immediately.
    • They cannot just put it in their pocket.
    • This judgment effectively ended the "Pocket Veto" of State Governors.

⚖️ Part 4: Speaker’s Immunity vs. Governor’s Review

The Speaker has a unique shield: Article 212.

  • The Rule: "The validity of any proceedings in the Legislature shall not be called in question on the ground of any alleged irregularity of procedure."
  • Meaning: The Courts (and the Governor) cannot tell the Speaker how to run the House.

The Conflict

  • Governor: "I want the Floor Test to be conducted by 'Show of Hands', not 'Voice Vote'."
  • Speaker: "You cannot dictate the procedure. I am the Master of the House. I will decide how the vote happens."
  • Legal Position: The Speaker is generally right. The Governor's job ends at summoning the House; the conduct of the House is the Speaker's domain.

🕵️ Part 5: The "Removal" Trap (Nabam Rebia Twist)

A clever legal trick used to paralyze the Speaker.

  • The Rule: Under the Nabam Rebia judgment, if a Motion for Removal is pending against the Speaker, the Speaker CANNOT disqualify any MLAs under the Anti-Defection Law.
  • The Trick:
    1. Rebel MLAs want to defect to topple the Govt.
    2. They fear the Speaker will disqualify them.
    3. So, they first send a "Notice for Removal" of the Speaker.
    4. Now the Speaker's hands are tied. They cannot disqualify the rebels.
    5. The rebels vote in the Floor Test and topple the Govt.
  • Status: The Supreme Court (in the Maharashtra case) admitted that this rule might be misused and has referred it to a larger 7-Judge Bench for review.

🧩 The "Bill Reservation" Power (Article 201)

Sometimes, the Governor plays the "President Card."

  • The Power: The Governor can reserve a Bill for the consideration of the President of India.
  • When? Theoretically, only if the Bill "endangers the position of the High Court."
  • Misuse: Governors reserve ordinary bills (e.g., University Laws) for the President just to delay them. Once it goes to the President (Centre), there is no time limit for the President to decide, and the State Government acts helpless.

❓ Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

Q1. Can the Governor dismiss a Minister?

Theoretically Yes, Practically No.

  • Article 164 says Ministers hold office during the "pleasure of the Governor."
  • Kerala Case (2022): The Kerala Governor threatened to "withdraw pleasure" from a Minister who insulted him.
  • Legal Position: The "Pleasure" is not the Governor's personal pleasure. It is the Chief Minister's pleasure. The Governor cannot dismiss a Minister unless the CM advises it.

Q2. Does the Speaker answer to the Governor?

No.

  • The Speaker is an independent constitutional authority. They are answerable only to the Assembly.
  • They do not report to the Governor.

Q3. Who administers the Oath to the Speaker?

No one.

  • The Speaker does not take a separate oath of office. They take the oath as an MP (administered by the Pro-Tem Speaker). Once elected as Speaker, they just assume the Chair.

Q4. Can the Court interfere if the Speaker suspends MLAs?

Yes.

  • While Article 212 bars courts from checking "procedural irregularities," the Court CAN intervene if the action is "Substantively Illegal" or unconstitutional.
  • Example: In 2021, the Supreme Court struck down the 1-year suspension of 12 BJP MLAs in Maharashtra, calling it "worse than expulsion" and irrational.

Q5. What is the solution to this conflict?

  • Sarkaria Commission (1988) & Punchhi Commission (2010) recommended:
    1. Governors should be eminent persons from outside the state.
    2. They should not be active politicians.
    3. A fixed timeline (6 months) for deciding on Bills.
    4. The "Floor Test" should be the only way to decide a majority, not the Raj Bhavan parade.

Bookmark this page. The battle for India's federal soul is fought in the corridors between the Assembly and the Raj Bhavan.