Within MP guv’s right to call for floor test: Experts
NEW DELHI: A state governor can call for a floor test if he believes, on the basis of the material before him that the government may have lost its majority, said eminent jurists and experts, commenting on the ongoing tussle between Madhya Pradesh governor Lalji Tandon and chief minister Kamal Nath. Experts also added that the speaker’s decision to abruptly adjourn the House to March 26 in the light of health concerns over Coronavirus was incorrect.
On Tuesday, Tandon set Tuesday as t he deadline f or t he elected government to prove its majority in the assembly after the floor test was not held on Monday.
Twenty-two Congress MLAS had quit the party on March 11 after Jyotiraditya Scindia — a former Member of Parliament and an influential next generation leader of the party with roots in the state — switched to the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) last week, pushing the Kamal Nath government into deep crisis. The 22 legislators have been in a Bengaluru resort ever since they resigned. The BJP so far has 109 MLAS in the 228 member assembly and needs only 104 MLAS to form government if all the resignations are accepted, since it will reduce the effective strength of the House.
Senior Supreme Court advocate and former solicitor general Ranjit Kumar argued that it was entirely up to the governor’s discretion, a non-justiciable decision, to direct an elected government to prove its majority. A Speaker is required to act as per the law regulating the proceedings of the House and conduct the floor test.
“If the Governor feels at any time in law, as is the constitutional obligation, that there is l ack of numbers i n a party because people have resigned and there is a representation before him underlining the loss of confidence in the elected government, he or she can direct the floor test. A governor has to choose if the government is in majority or not,” Kumar said.
Former secretary general of
Text by Murali Krishnan
Can the decision of speaker on the floor of the house be questioned in the court? Can SC ask the speaker to get a floor test done?
The decision of the speaker regarding the proceedings on the floor of the house is usually final and cannot be questioned in a court of law.
However, the SC has, time and again, acknowledged that it can step in and order floor tests to be held within a specified time frame, particularly when there is possibility of horse trading. The top court had ordered such floor tests in May 2016 to test the majority of the government in Uttarakhand and in May 2018 with respect to Karnataka.
Is there a time frame within which the speaker has to decide on the resignations?
There is no time prescribed in the Constitution for the speaker to decide on resignations.
Is the speaker required to hear each legislator in person before deciding on their resignations?
As per Article 190 of the Constitution, a lawmaker can resign his seat by “writing under his hand addressed to the speaker”. However, when the speaker has reasons to think that a resignation is not voluntary or genuine, he can hear the MLA in person to ascertain the genuineness of the resignation. Once it is demonstrated that an MLA is willing to resign out of his free will, the speaker has no option. The satisfaction of the speaker with regard to resignation is subject to judicial review in such cases.
Lok Sabha PDT Achary referred to Supreme Court judgements — and said the SC had consistently held that if the governor thought the government was in a minority, then he or she had to convene an assembly at the earliest to hold the floor test.
“There is nothing wrong in the governor asking the chief minister to prove his support. He is within his right. If the CM fails to act on the direction of the governor then it is a defiance of the directive,” he explained. On the speaker’s decision to adjourn the House, Achary argued, “If Parliament can function so can the Assembly.”
Supreme Court advocate Gya
Most recently, when the government formation in Maharashtra came before the SC in November 2019.
“In a situation wherein, if the floor test is delayed, there is a possibility of horse trading, it becomes incumbent upon the Court to act to protect democratic values. An immediate floor test, in such a case, might be the most effective mechanism to do so”, the court said in order of November 26 while ordering a floor test to be held the very next day.
nant Singh noted that the floor of the House was the best place to test a government’s majority, and it was the governor’s discretionary power to order the floor test — in contrast to his executive function where he acted on the aid and advice of the council of ministers.
“The governor can decide the time, taking into consideration prospects of horse trading and other unconstitutional means likely to be adopted by a government to regain majority. Under our constitution, only the president and governors take oath to preserve, protect and defend the constitution, others take oath to abide by it,” he said.