Centre-State relations and the Governor sit at the point where Indian federalism is tested most often, and Bihar has supplied some of the biggest tests: eight spells of President’s Rule, the 2005 dissolution that the Supreme Court struck down in Rameshwar Prasad, and long arguments over bills kept waiting for assent. BPSC asks about this topic in both prelims and mains, so these notes give the articles, the cases and the commissions first, and then the Bihar story.
Key facts for BPSC
| Provision | What it says |
|---|---|
| Article 153 | There shall be a Governor for each State (one person may be Governor of two or more States, 7th Amendment, 1956) |
| Article 155 and 156 | Appointed by the President; holds office during the President’s pleasure, normally for five years |
| Article 157 and 158 | Must be a citizen of India and at least 35; cannot be an MP or MLA or hold an office of profit |
| Article 159 | Oath administered by the Chief Justice of the High Court (or the senior-most judge) |
| Article 161 | Power to pardon, reprieve, remit or commute sentences under State laws (not death sentences, unlike the President under Article 72) |
| Article 163 | Council of Ministers aids and advises the Governor, except where the Constitution requires discretion |
| Article 164 | Chief Minister appointed by the Governor; other ministers on the CM’s advice; ministers hold office during the Governor’s pleasure |
| Article 200 and 201 | Assent to bills: assent, withhold, return (non-money bills) or reserve for the President |
| Article 213 | Ordinances when the legislature is not in session |
| Article 356 | President’s Rule on the Governor’s report or otherwise; approval by Parliament within two months; six months at a time, up to three years |
| Article 263 | Inter-State Council (set up in 1990 on the Sarkaria Commission’s advice) |
| Article 280 | Finance Commission, every five years, recommends the sharing of taxes between the Union and the States |
How the Constitution divides power
Part XI (Articles 245 to 263) and the Seventh Schedule set out the legislative and administrative relations between the Union and the States. The Union List now has about 100 entries (originally 97), the State List 61 (originally 66) and the Concurrent List 52 (originally 47); residuary powers lie with Parliament (Article 248). Part XII covers financial relations: the Finance Commission under Article 280, grants-in-aid under Article 275 and the GST Council under Article 279A (101st Amendment, 2016). The tilt towards the Centre is deliberate. Parliament can legislate on State subjects in the national interest (Article 249), during an Emergency (Article 250) or when two or more States ask it to (Article 252), and Article 356 lets the Union take over a State government altogether. The Constitution is therefore often described as federal in form but unitary in spirit, or, in K. C. Wheare’s phrase, quasi-federal.
The Governor’s role in Centre-State relations
The Governor is the constitutional head of the State and, at the same time, the Union’s representative in it. Four of the Governor’s powers decide how smoothly the two levels work together.
- Choosing a Chief Minister when no party has a clear majority, and deciding whether and when to call for a floor test. The Supreme Court in S. R. Bommai v. Union of India (1994) held that majority must be tested on the floor of the House, not judged in Raj Bhavan.
- Reporting to the President under Article 356 that the government of the State cannot be carried on in accordance with the Constitution. Most impositions of President’s Rule rest on such a report.
- Assent to bills under Article 200, including the power to reserve a bill for the President. In State of Punjab v. Principal Secretary to the Governor (2023) the Supreme Court held that a Governor who withholds assent must return the bill to the legislature and cannot simply sit on it, and in the Tamil Nadu case of April 2025 it went further, laying down time limits and holding that bills re-passed by the Assembly must be assented to.
- Discretionary functions under Article 163(2), where the Governor’s own judgment is final, such as recommending President’s Rule or reserving a bill; the Court in Nabam Rebia (2016) held that summoning the Assembly on his own is not among them.
The landmark cases
- S. R. Bommai v. Union of India (1994): a nine-judge bench held that proclamations under Article 356 are subject to judicial review, that the Assembly should not be dissolved until Parliament approves the proclamation, and that secularism is part of the basic structure. It is the single most important case on Centre-State relations.
- Rameshwar Prasad v. Union of India (2006): arose from Bihar. After the February 2005 Assembly election produced a hung House, Governor Buta Singh reported that MLAs were being lured by money, and the Cabinet dissolved the Assembly at night on 22 May 2005 before it had ever met. The Supreme Court held the dissolution unconstitutional, calling the Governor’s report a case of “drastic and extreme action” on unverified claims, though it did not restore the Assembly because fresh elections had already been announced. Buta Singh resigned in January 2006.
- Nabam Rebia v. Deputy Speaker (2016): Arunachal Pradesh; the Governor cannot advance an Assembly session or set its agenda without the advice of the Council of Ministers.
- Shamsher Singh v. State of Punjab (1974): the Governor is bound by ministerial advice except in matters where the Constitution gives discretion.
Commissions that reviewed Centre-State relations
| Commission | Years | Main recommendations |
|---|---|---|
| Administrative Reforms Commission (first) | 1966 to 1970 | Governors should be eminent persons from outside the State; Inter-State Council under Article 263 |
| Rajamannar Committee (Tamil Nadu) | 1969 to 1971 | Abolish Article 356 and the All India Services; make the Inter-State Council permanent |
| Sarkaria Commission | 1983 to 1988 | Governor to be a detached figure, not from the State, appointed after consulting the Chief Minister; Article 356 only as a last resort; set up the Inter-State Council (done in 1990) |
| Punchhi Commission | 2007 to 2010 | Fixed five-year tenure for Governors, removal by impeachment-like process, time limit of six months for assent to bills, Governor should not be made Chancellor of universities |
Bihar’s experience with Article 356
President’s Rule has been imposed in Bihar eight times: in 1968, 1969, 1972, 1977, 1980, 1995, 1999 and 2005. The 1977 and 1980 impositions were part of the all-India dismissals of State governments after a change of government at the Centre, the kind of use that Bommai later condemned. The 1999 imposition under Governor Sunder Singh Bhandari, after the Jehanabad (Shankarbigha) massacre, lasted only a few weeks because the Union government could not get it approved in the Rajya Sabha and revoked it. The 2005 spell under Buta Singh, from March to November, produced the Rameshwar Prasad judgment and ended with the November 2005 election that brought Nitish Kumar to power. Since 2005 Bihar has had no President’s Rule, which is itself a sign of how far the use of Article 356 has fallen since Bommai.
Bihar’s Governors have also been in the news over assent to bills and university appointments, where the Governor acts as Chancellor. The office is currently held by Lt Gen (Retd) Syed Ata Hasnain, who took oath in March 2026 as the State’s 43rd Governor and administered the oath to Chief Minister Samrat Choudhary on 15 April 2026.
Criticisms and reform ideas
The main complaints are familiar: Governors are chosen by the Union government and often come from active politics, they stay in office at the Union’s pleasure, and their discretionary decisions on government formation, floor tests and bills can serve the ruling party at the Centre. The reforms on the table are also familiar, from the Sarkaria and Punchhi reports: consultation with the Chief Minister before appointment, a fixed tenure, clear timelines for assent, and a bar on Governors returning to active politics. What has changed is the courts’ willingness to police the office, from Bommai in 1994 to the Tamil Nadu bills case in 2025.
Quick revision: likely BPSC questions
- Minimum age to be Governor? 35 years (Article 157).
- Who administers the Governor’s oath? Chief Justice of the High Court (Article 159).
- Which article gives the Governor the power of pardon? Article 161.
- Which case made Article 356 proclamations subject to judicial review? S. R. Bommai (1994).
- Which Bihar case concerned the 2005 dissolution of the Assembly? Rameshwar Prasad v. Union of India (2006).
- Which commission led to the Inter-State Council? Sarkaria Commission; council set up in 1990.
- How many times has President’s Rule been imposed in Bihar? Eight (last in 2005).
Practise this topic
- Bihar Polity and Geography PYQ Quiz for BPSC (67 MCQs)
- NCERT Class 12 History Quiz 1: Colonial India and the Constitution
- 72nd BPSC Mock Test: 100 GS Questions
More on BPSC Guru
- 72nd BPSC 2026: notification, vacancies and exam date
- BPSC syllabus and exam pattern 2026
- All free BPSC mock tests and quizzes
- BPSC negative marking and the Option E rule