The Union Home Ministry recently clarified in the Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court that the Lieutenant Governor (LG) of Jammu & Kashmir can nominate five members to the Legislative Assembly without the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers. This assertion has sparked debate about constitutional provisions and democratic norms in Union Territories (UTs) with legislatures.
Constitutional Provisions for Nominated Members
The Constitution of India allows nominated members in Parliament and State legislatures. The Rajya Sabha has 12 nominated members appointed by the President on the Union Council of Ministers’ advice. Earlier, two Anglo-Indian members were nominated to the Lok Sabha and one to State Assemblies, but this ended in 2020. In six States with Legislative Councils, Governors nominate nearly one-sixth of members based on the State Council of Ministers’ advice.
Nominated Members in Union Territories
UTs with legislatures have their composition defined by Parliamentary Acts. Delhi’s Assembly has 70 elected members and no nominated MLAs. Puducherry’s Assembly has 30 elected members and up to three nominated by the Union government. Jammu & Kashmir’s Assembly, post-2019 reorganisation, has 90 elected members and up to five nominated by the LG—two women, two Kashmiri migrants, and one displaced person from Pakistan-occupied Kashmir.
Judicial Interpretations on Nomination Powers
The Madras High Court in 2018 upheld the Union government’s power to nominate three members to Puducherry Assembly without the UT Council of Ministers’ advice. However, it suggested clearer statutory guidelines. The Supreme Court later set aside these recommendations. In the 2023 Government of NCT of Delhi versus Union of India case, the Supreme Court introduced the ‘triple chain of command’ principle. It held that the LG must act on the Council of Ministers’ advice in all matters except where the Assembly lacks legislative power. This principle may extend to nominations as well.
Democratic Implications and Political Context
UTs differ from full States but have elected governments accountable to their people. Nominated MLAs can affect assembly majorities, especially in smaller legislatures like J&K and Puducherry. Political differences between the Centre and UT governments risk undermining democratic mandates. Jammu & Kashmir’s unique history as a former State with special autonomy adds complexity. Although its UT status is legally valid, the Union government has pledged to restore statehood soon. Hence, requiring LG nominations to follow the Council of Ministers’ advice would strengthen democratic accountability.
Questions for UPSC:
- Critically discuss the constitutional provisions for nominated members in Indian legislatures and their impact on democratic governance.
- Examine the role of the Lieutenant Governor in Union Territories with legislative assemblies and analyse the challenges posed by political differences between the Union and UT governments.
- Estimate the effects of nominated members on the stability of legislative assemblies in smaller Union Territories like Jammu & Kashmir and Puducherry.
- Point out the significance of the ‘triple chain of command’ doctrine established by the Supreme Court and how it ensures democratic accountability in Union Territories.
