Sarkaria Commission Recommendations on the Governor

Sarkaria Commission governor recommendations are best remembered for a single, pointed suggestion: that the person appointed to the office should be an eminent figure from outside the state, detached from its day-to-day politics rather than someone who had recently been active in it. The Commission, set up in 1983 to examine the working of Centre-State relations, treated the manner of appointing Governors as one important element of the larger federal relationship it was reviewing, and its proposal on the Governor's office has continued to shape how the appointment is discussed.

The Core Recommendation: An Eminent, Apolitical Outsider

The Sarkaria Commission's recommendation on this point was specific: a Governor should be an eminent person, appointed from outside the state concerned, who is a detached figure without intense political links and who has not taken part in politics in the recent past. The emphasis fell on two qualities together — eminence, so that the office carries genuine standing, and detachment from the state's own political contests, so that the appointee is not seen as beholden to any local faction.

Why the Governor's Neutrality Matters

The logic behind this recommendation becomes clearer when set against the range of functions the Constitution actually assigns to the Governor. The President consults the Governor of the concerned state in the process of appointing judges of that state's High Court, under Article 217. The Governor makes appointments to the state's judicial service, other than district judges, in consultation with the State Public Service Commission and the High Court exercising jurisdiction over the state, under Article 234. Under Article 243K, the Governor appoints the State Election Commissioner, who then holds office with security of tenure comparable to that of a High Court judge and superintends elections to the state's Panchayats. And under Article 243-I, the Governor must constitute a State Finance Commission every five years to recommend how the state's resources should be shared with local bodies. Each of these functions touches an area — the judiciary, the electoral machinery, or local-government finance — where the perception of even-handedness matters a great deal. An office with this reach works best, the Commission's reasoning implied, when its occupant is not seen as a player in the ruling party's day-to-day battles within that state.

UPSC Relevance

Prelims: The Sarkaria Commission's specific recommendation — an eminent, apolitical outsider as Governor — is a recurring objective-type question, often set against similar-sounding recommendations of other bodies such as the First Administrative Reforms Commission or the Rajamannar Committee.

Mains: GS Paper II questions on Centre-State relations may ask candidates to connect the Sarkaria Commission's recommendation on gubernatorial appointments to the wider constitutional powers the Governor exercises over the judiciary, elections and local-body finance.

FAQ

Q1. When was the Sarkaria Commission set up, and what was its mandate? It was set up in 1983 to examine the working of Centre-State relations in India.

Q2. What did the Sarkaria Commission recommend about the Governor's appointment? That the Governor should be an eminent person, appointed from outside the state, who is a detached figure without intense political links and has not taken part in state politics in the recent past.

Q3. Why does the Governor's political detachment matter? Because the Governor exercises functions touching the judiciary (Article 217, 234), the state's electoral machinery (Article 243K) and local-body finance (Article 243-I) — areas where perceived neutrality strengthens the office's credibility.

Q4. Does the Governor appoint the State Election Commissioner directly? Yes, under Article 243K, though the Commissioner then enjoys security of tenure similar to a High Court judge.

Q5. Is the Sarkaria recommendation legally binding on the Centre? No — it is a recommendation, not a constitutional requirement, and the choice of who to appoint as Governor remains with the Union executive.

Quick Revision

• Sarkaria Commission (1983): reviewed Centre-State relations.
• Recommendation: Governor should be an eminent, apolitical outsider to the state.
• Governor's powers touching neutrality-sensitive areas: Article 217 (HC judge consultation), Article 234 (judicial service appointments), Article 243K (State Election Commissioner), Article 243-I (State Finance Commission).
• The recommendation is advisory, not constitutionally binding.

Sources

• Sarkaria Commission Report, Government of India (1983) — official Commission record.
• The Constitution of India, Articles 217, 234, 243-I and 243K — legislative.gov.in

Further Reference

For deeper reading on this topic and the wider polity syllabus, these standard works are recommended:

• M. Laxmikanth, Indian Polity (McGraw Hill) — the standard UPSC handbook.
• D.D. Basu, Introduction to the Constitution of India (LexisNexis) — authoritative constitutional-law treatment.
• The Constitution of India — Bare Act — the official text.

Disclosure: As an Amazon Associate, UPSC.wiki earns from qualifying purchases — at no extra cost to you.