Content

1. Governor’s Constitutional Duties & Address to Legislature 
2. Dilution of Environmental Justice in India 

Governor’s Constitutional Duties & Address to Legislature 

Constitutional Position of Governor

Nature of Office

• Governor is constitutional head of State; though executive power is formally vested in Governor, it is exercised on aid and advice of Council of Ministers (Articles 163–164) in a parliamentary system.
• Article 168 makes Governor part of State Legislature along with Assembly/Council, showing role is institutionally embedded in law-making process, not merely ceremonial symbolism.
• Governor is expected to act as neutral constitutional sentinel, preserving federal balance, constitutional morality, and democratic mandate rather than acting as political agent of Union government.

Relevance

GS-2 (Polity):

• Governor’s powers, aid-and-advice principle, Articles 163, 168, 175, 176, and limits of discretion.
• Centre–State relations, federalism, constitutional conventions, Punchhi Commission reforms.

Practice Question

• “The Governor is meant to be a constitutional sentinel, not a political actor.”
  Examine the constitutional duties of the Governor regarding the legislative address and discuss issues arising from recent controversies. Suggest reforms. (15M)

Duty Regarding Address to Legislature

Article 176 — Special Address

• Article 176 mandates Governor’s address at first session after general election and first session each year, making it a constitutional obligation, not optional political convention.
• Address communicates government’s legislative and policy agenda, drafted exclusively by elected Council of Ministers, reflecting democratic will and collective cabinet responsibility before legislature.
• Refusal to read, truncating, or selectively omitting portions violates spirit of cabinet responsibility, since Governor substitutes personal judgment for elected executive’s policy communication.

Discretion and Limits

Can Governor Alter Speech?

• Governor cannot alter Cabinet-approved text, as address is executive act performed on aid and advice; Governor bears no legal or political responsibility for its contents.
• Supreme Court in Nabam Rebia (2016) held Governor must ordinarily act on aid and advice in legislative matters, limiting discretionary space and reinforcing parliamentary accountability.
• Discretion exists only in rare constitutional situations, not for judging desirability or ideology of government policies contained in legislative address.

Related Constitutional Provisions

Article 175

• Article 175 allows Governor to address or send messages to legislature regarding pending bills, but this is supplementary power and cannot replace mandatory Article 176 special address.

Article 355

• Article 355 obligates Union to ensure State governance aligns with Constitution; persistent gubernatorial deviation from Article 176 raises questions about meaningful discharge of this Union duty.

Article 160

• Article 160 empowers President to make provisions for discharge of Governor’s functions in contingencies, theoretically enabling directions when gubernatorial conduct risks constitutional breakdown.

Accountability Structure

President vs Governor

• President is indirectly elected and removable by impeachment, creating institutional accountability to Parliament, which moderates conduct through constitutional and political checks.
• Governor holds office at pleasure of President (Union government), lacking impeachment process, leading to perception of political dependence and weaker accountability to State Legislature.
• This asymmetry explains why Presidents rarely attract controversy, whereas Governors often face allegations of partisanship in politically contested States.

Federalism and Governance Dimension

Centre–State Relations

• Partisan gubernatorial actions in Opposition-ruled States generate friction, undermine cooperative federalism, and create perception of indirect Union interference in State legislative functioning.
• Delays or disruptions in legislative sessions due to Governor’s conduct can indirectly affect law-making, budget approvals, and democratic governance at State level.

Colonial Legacy Debate

Retain or Remove?

• Supporters argue Governor’s address reflects Westminster parliamentary tradition, symbolising constitutional continuity and formal link between executive policies and legislative scrutiny.
• Critics argue practice is largely ceremonial, non-essential for legislative functioning, and increasingly politicised, thus reconsideration may be justified in modern federal democracy.

Ethical and Normative Dimension

Constitutional Morality

• Constitutional morality requires Governors to prioritise democratic mandate, restraint, and neutrality, even when personal or political preferences differ from elected government’s policies.
• Visible partisanship erodes public trust in constitutional offices and weakens legitimacy of federal institutions designed to be politically neutral.

Challenges and Grey Areas

Practical Concerns

• Constitution does not clearly specify penalties or corrective mechanisms if Governor refuses to deliver address, creating enforcement ambiguity and reliance on conventions.
• Presidential removal of Governor for such conduct is legally possible but politically sensitive, risking accusations of central overreach.

Way Forward

Reform Measures

• Punchhi Commission recommended fixed tenure, consultative appointment, and non-partisan individuals as Governors to strengthen neutrality and federal trust.
• Codified guidelines on gubernatorial conduct can clarify limits of discretion and reduce recurrent constitutional confrontations.
• Strengthening conventions of dialogue between Chief Minister and Governor can resolve disagreements privately, preserving dignity of institutions.

Dilution of Environmental Justice in India 

Context and Core Concern

Emerging Trend

• Recent policy and judicial trends indicate systematic dilution of environmental safeguards, where development priorities increasingly override ecological concerns, raising questions about India’s constitutional commitment to environmental protection and intergenerational equity.
• Policy shift allowing EIA without prior site specificity (2025) weakens scientific appraisal, reducing ability to assess cumulative ecological impacts, carrying risks of arbitrary approvals and post-facto regularisation of damage.

Relevance  

GS-2 (Polity):

• Article 21, 48A, 51A(g), Article 14 — environmental rights and duties.
• Judiciary’s role in environmental protection.

GS-3 (Environment):

• EIA, precautionary principle, polluter pays, public trust doctrine.
• Aravallis, mangroves, Himalayas — ecology & disaster risks.

Practice Question  

• Environmental governance in India is witnessing a shift from precaution to post-facto regularisation.Critically examine in the light of constitutional provisions and recent trends. (15M)

Constitutional Framework

Article 21 — Right to Environment

• Supreme Court has consistently read right to clean and healthy environment into Article 21, making environmental protection integral to right to life, dignity, and public health.
• Diluting environmental safeguards indirectly compromises Article 21 by exposing citizens to pollution, ecological degradation, climate risks, and disaster vulnerability.

Directive Principles

• Article 48A obligates State to protect and improve environment and safeguard forests and wildlife, forming constitutional foundation for environmental governance and policy restraint.
• Weak enforcement or dilution turns Article 48A into symbolic commitment rather than operational constitutional directive guiding state action.

Fundamental Duty

• Article 51A(g) imposes duty on citizens to protect natural environment; however, citizen responsibility becomes ineffective if state policies themselves enable ecological degradation.

Equality and Non-Arbitrariness

• Height-based Aravalli definition creates artificial classification lacking ecological rationale, potentially violating Article 14’s non-arbitrariness and reasonable classification doctrine.

Judicial Dimension

Progressive Jurisprudence (Past)

• In Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum (1996), SC adopted precautionary principle and polluter pays principle, embedding sustainability into Indian environmental jurisprudence.
• M.C. Mehta cases recognised ecological fragility of Aravallis and imposed mining restrictions, showing earlier judicial leadership in conservation.
• Public Trust Doctrine (M.C. Mehta v. Kamal Nath, 1996) held natural resources are held in trust by State for public, limiting privatisation and ecological harm.

Recent Judicial Leniency

• Recall of Vanashakti judgment (2025) and acceptance of post-facto or conditional clearances signal shift from deterrence to accommodation of violations.
• Acceptance of 100-metre Aravalli definition (2025) narrows legal protection, excluding ecologically linked low-altitude ridges critical for hydrology and biodiversity.
• Judicial approvals for mangrove destruction and infrastructure expansion reflect growing reliance on mitigation promises over strict compliance.

Environmental and Scientific Concerns

Aravallis

• Aravallis function as barrier against desertification, groundwater recharge zone, and biodiversity corridor, crucial for north-west India’s climate stability.
• Fragmented or height-centric definitions ignore geomorphological continuity and ecological interdependence, undermining landscape-level conservation.

Mangroves

• Mangroves serve as carbon sinks, flood buffers, and biodiversity nurseries; mature ecosystems require decades to develop, making compensatory afforestation scientifically inadequate.

Himalayas and Char Dham

• Himalayan ecosystems are geologically young and fragile; study identifying 811 landslide zones (2025) highlights disaster risks from large-scale road expansion.

Governance and Procedural Justice

Regulatory Weakening

• EIA dilution, shortened hearings, and checklist-style compliance reduce meaningful public participation and scientific scrutiny in decision-making.
• Procedural shortcuts erode transparency, accountability, and environmental democracy, weakening legitimacy of clearances.

Corporate Influence Concerns

• Perception that large capital-backed projects navigate regulatory barriers easily raises concerns of regulatory capture and unequal application of law, affecting constitutional fairness.

Ethical and Intergenerational Dimension

Intergenerational Equity

• Environmental degradation imposes irreversible costs on future generations, conflicting with principle that present development must not compromise future ecological security.
• Constitutionally implied sustainability requires balancing economic growth with long-term ecological resilience.

Challenges

Structural Issues

• Developmental pressures, fiscal incentives, and political economy of infrastructure create bias toward project approvals over precaution.
• Courts face tension between economic growth imperatives and ecological jurisprudence, leading to inconsistent outcomes.

Way Forward

Reform Measures

• Strengthen independent, science-based EIA regime with cumulative impact assessments and credible public consultations.
• Institutionalise regular Green Benches in SC and HCs for specialised, consistent environmental adjudication.
• Reinforce application of precautionary principle, polluter pays, and public trust doctrine in all ecological matters.
• Promote development models integrating ecological economics, climate resilience, and natural capital accounting.