Question map
Which one of the following suggested that the Governor should be an eminent person from outside the State and should be a detached figure without intense political links or should not have taken part in politics in the recent past?
Explanation
The correct answer is option C - Sarkaria Commission (1983).
The Sarkaria Commission recommended that a person to be appointed as Governor should be eminent in some walk of life, should be a person from outside the state, should be a detached figure and not too intimately connected with the local politics of the state, and should be a person who has not taken too great a part in politics generally, particularly in the recent past.[1] The Commission further recommended that it is desirable that a politician from the ruling party at the Centre is not appointed as Governor of a State which is being run by some other party or a combination of other parties.[1]
While the First Administrative Reforms Commission (1966) did recommend appointment of persons having long experience in public life and administration and non-partisan attitude as governors[2], it did not specifically emphasize all the criteria mentioned in the question. The National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution (2000) advocated for political neutrality[3], but it actually reiterated the recommendations of the Sarkaria Commission regarding appointment of Governors[4], making the Sarkaria Commission the original source of these comprehensive guidelines.
Sources- [1] Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth(7th ed.) > Chapter 30: Governor > Qualifications > p. 314
- [2] Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth(7th ed.) > Chapter 15: Centre-State Relations > Administrative Reforms Commission > p. 158
- [3] https://www.thehindu.com/education/should-governors-be-chancellors-of-state-universities/article69143174.ece
- [4] https://www.thehindu.com/news/resources/69440965-Supreme-Court-judgement-in-Tamil-Nadu-Governor-case
PROVENANCE & STUDY PATTERN
Full viewThis is a classic 'Sitter' found verbatim in standard texts like Laxmikanth (Chapters on Governor or Centre-State Relations). It tests your ability to distinguish the 'moderate/constructive' recommendations of Sarkaria from the 'radical' demands of Rajamannar or the 'legalistic' reforms of Punchhi.
This question can be broken into the following sub-statements. Tap a statement sentence to jump into its detailed analysis.
- Statement 1: Did the First Administrative Reforms Commission (1966) recommend that the Governor of an Indian state should be an eminent person from outside the State and a detached figure without intense political links or recent political participation?
- Statement 2: Did the Rajamannar Committee (1969) recommend that the Governor of an Indian state should be an eminent person from outside the State and a detached figure without intense political links or recent political participation?
- Statement 3: Did the Sarkaria Commission (1983) recommend that the Governor of an Indian state should be an eminent person from outside the State and a detached figure without intense political links or recent political participation?
- Statement 4: Did the National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution (2000) recommend that the Governor of an Indian state should be an eminent person from outside the State and a detached figure without intense political links or recent political participation?
- Explicitly records that the First Administrative Reforms Commission (1966) recommended appointment of governors with long experience in public life and a non‑partisan attitude.
- Directly ties ARC (1966) recommendations to the criteria for choosing governors (experience and non‑partisanship).
- Enumerates the desirable qualifications for a Governor: eminent in some walk of life and a person from outside the State.
- Specifies that the Governor should be a detached figure, not too intimately connected with state politics, and should not have taken too great a part in recent politics.
- States it is desirable to have governors from outside who are detached and acceptable to the province.
- Reinforces the notion of detachment and being 'eminent' in some field as desirable attributes for governors.
Gives an explicit, widely cited list of desirable qualifications for a Governor: 'eminent in some walk of life', 'person from outside the state', 'detached figure', and 'not taken too great a part in politics... particularly in the recent past.'
A student could treat this as the standard/accepted formulation of Governor-qualifications and check whether Rajamannar's report (or summaries of it) advocated similar language or influenced this norm.
The same set of Governor qualifications is repeated (corroborating the existence of a canonical list of desirable traits for Governors).
Use this corroborated description as a baseline to compare with the Rajamannar Committee's recommendations (e.g., by locating the committee's text or authoritative summaries to see if it aligns).
Notes controversy over Governors' partisanship and records that a later commission (Sarkaria, 1983) recommended that Governor appointments be strictly non-partisan.
A student could infer a pattern of commissions addressing Governor neutrality and seek whether Rajamannar (an earlier committee) made similar non‑partisanship or outsider-type recommendations.
Lists Rajamannar Committee recommendations concerning Governors/President's Rule (e.g., omitting Article 356 and the provision that the state ministry holds office during the pleasure of the governor), showing the committee did engage with the constitutional role and powers of the Governor.
Because the committee addressed Governor-related constitutional provisions, a student might reasonably look within its report for recommendations about the Governor's personal qualifications or appointment conventions.
Identifies the Rajamannar Committee (1969–71) as a body set up to examine centre–state relations and suggest constitutional amendments to secure greater state autonomy — indicating it examined matters closely related to the Governor's role.
Knowing the committee's mandate, a student could target the committee's report for any explicit recommendation on the Governor's background/partisanship as part of centre–state reform proposals.
- Directly records Sarkaria Commission's view on the Governor's role as needing neutrality vis-à-vis the Centre.
- Saying the Governor should act as a 'link' and not an 'agent' implies preference for a detached, non‑political posture.
- Highlights criticism of politicisation of the Governor's office, noting appointment of defeated politicians harmed the office's dignity.
- Supports the inference that Sarkaria sought removing intense political links from the office (i.e., recommending non‑political/eminent persons).
Explicitly states the Sarkaria Commission recommended that appointments of Governors should be strictly non-partisan, indicating the Commission gave guidance on the character/selection of Governors.
A student could treat 'strictly non-partisan' as a rule implying avoidance of recent political activity and then check the Sarkaria report or secondary sources for wording about outside/state origin and political detachment.
Contains the phrase (truncated) that the Governor 'should be ... from outside the State and should be a detached figure without intense political...', showing there exists at least one authoritative text/question that frames the Governor's ideal as external and detached.
A student could use this phrasing to search the Sarkaria recommendations or related constitutional literature to confirm whether Sarkaria (or another authority cited) used the exact recommendation.
Notes that the Sarkaria Commission made specific recommendations regarding the selection and appointment of a governor, signalling that details (qualifications/preferences) were provided by the Commission.
Use this as a pointer to the list of Sarkaria's selection recommendations (e.g., in a textbook or the report) to see if 'eminent person from outside the State' and 'no recent political participation' are among them.
Describes Sarkaria's discussion of issues in Governor functioning and principles for discretionary actions, showing the Commission engaged with normative guidance on gubernatorial role and conduct.
Combine this pattern (Sarkaria supplying normative guidance) with the 'non-partisan' clue to reasonably suspect the Commission commented on personal background and political links; then verify by consulting the actual report.
States that the Central government implemented many Sarkaria recommendations, implying the Commission's prescriptions on governor matters were influential and likely detailed in the report.
Given high implementation, a student can prioritize checking implemented recommendations (official summaries or govt notifications) to see if the 'outside/detached' formulation appears.
- Explicitly states the NCRWC advocated 'political neutrality', which aligns with recommending a detached figure without intense political links or recent political participation.
- Discusses NCRWC's recommendations regarding the role and neutrality of Governors/Chancellors, tying the Commission to reforms on political detachment.
- Shows the NCRWC reiterated recommendations after considering suggestions by the Sarkaria Commission, which is the commission known for recommending an 'eminent person from outside the State' model for Governors.
- Links the NCRWC to the specific stream of recommendations (Sarkaria's) concerning Governor appointments.
- States that acting on recommendations of the Sarkaria Commission and the Committee of the National Commission to review the working of the Constitution could avoid allegations of political bias in Governor appointments.
- Indicates the NCRWC (via its committee) made recommendations on appointment of Governors aimed at reducing political links/bias.
Gives an explicit list of desirable criteria for appointment as Governor: 'eminent in some walk of life', 'a person from outside the state', 'a detached figure', and 'not taken too great a part in politics...particularly in the recent past'.
A student could treat these widely cited criteria as a standard against which to check whether NCRWC recommendations aligned with or echoed the same norms by consulting the NCRWC report or summaries.
Explains the normative idea that a Governor 'should be a more detached figure' and that it is 'desirable to have people from outside, eminent in something', providing a general rule about ideal Governor characteristics.
Use this normative rule as a background expectation to test whether the NCRWC formally recommended similar traits in its text.
Notes that the Sarkaria Commission recommended that appointments of Governors should be strictly non-partisan, showing an institutional pattern of recommending non-partisan/detached appointments.
A student can treat Sarkaria's recommendation as precedent and check whether the NCRWC followed, modified, or rejected that precedent in its recommendations.
Summarizes some NCRWC recommendations about Governor appointment procedure (consultation with Chief Minister) and limiting Governor powers, indicating the commission addressed Governor-related norms even if this snippet doesn't state the 'outside/detached' formulation.
Because the commission discussed Governor roles and appointment practice, a student could reasonably inspect the full NCRWC report for whether it also addressed the Governor's personal qualifications (eminent/outside/detached).
Establishes that the NCRWC was set up in 2000 and submitted a report in 2002, confirming the commission as the relevant body whose recommendations could be checked for Governor-related guidance.
Knowing the commission's existence and report date allows a student to locate the NCRWC report (2002) and search it for specific language about Governor qualifications.
- [THE VERDICT]: Sitter. Direct hit from Laxmikanth, Chapter 15 (Centre-State Relations) or Chapter 30 (Governor).
- [THE CONCEPTUAL TRIGGER]: Evolution of Centre-State Relations and the specific recommendations of major Commissions (ARC, Sarkaria, Punchhi).
- [THE HORIZONTAL EXPANSION]: Memorize the 'Signature Recommendation' of each: 1. Sarkaria (1983): 'Detached figure', 'Outsider', Consult CM. 2. Punchhi (2007): Fixed 5-year term, Impeachment by State Assembly, End 'Doctrine of Pleasure'. 3. Rajamannar (1969): Abolish Art 356/357, Abolish All-India Services. 4. 1st ARC (1966): Non-partisan, long public experience.
- [THE STRATEGIC METACOGNITION]: Do not just read that these commissions existed. Create a 'Keyword Map': 'Outsider' -> Sarkaria; 'Impeachment' -> Punchhi; 'Abolish' -> Rajamannar. UPSC swaps these keywords to create options.
Governor appointments are recommended to prefer eminent outsiders who are detached from intense state politics and recent partisan activity.
High-yield for polity questions on the office of the Governor and centre‑state relations; links to topics on appointment controversies, neutrality of constitutional posts, and criteria tested in commission recommendations. Mastering this helps answer direct questions on Governor qualifications and related reform recommendations.
- Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth(7th ed.) > Chapter 30: Governor > Qualifications > p. 314
- Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu (26th ed.). > Chapter 13: The State Executive > 2. The Governor > p. 270
The First ARC recommended appointing governors who have long public/administrative experience and who maintain a non‑partisan attitude.
Important for questions on major commission recommendations and administrative reforms; connects to broader themes of improving neutrality in constitutional appointments and centre‑state institutional design. Knowing commission-wise recommendations is frequently tested in mains and prelims.
- Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth(7th ed.) > Chapter 15: Centre-State Relations > Administrative Reforms Commission > p. 158
Policy guidance emphasizes detachment and non‑partisanship in selecting governors to reduce political interference.
Useful for essay and ethics questions on constitutional morality and for analysing commissions (e.g., ARC, Sarkaria) on governor conduct; helps in evaluating cases of alleged partisan misuse of gubernatorial power and in answering comparative questions on institutional safeguards.
- Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth(7th ed.) > Chapter 15: Centre-State Relations > Administrative Reforms Commission > p. 158
- Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu (26th ed.). > Chapter 13: The State Executive > 2. The Governor > p. 270
- Indian Constitution at Work, Political Science Class XI (NCERT 2025 ed.) > Chapter 7: FEDERALISM > Role of Governors and President's Rule > p. 166
Sets out that a governor should be eminent, from outside the state, a detached figure and not recently active in politics.
High-yield for polity questions on constitutional offices and centre–state relations; helps answer questions about appointment norms, controversies over partisan governors, and compares with commission recommendations (e.g., Sarkaria). Mastering this clarifies normative versus constitutional positions and supports analysis of governor-centre tensions.
- Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth(7th ed.) > Chapter 30: Governor > Qualifications > p. 314
- Laxmikanth, M. Indian Polity. 7th ed., McGraw Hill. > Chapter 30: Governor > Qualifications > p. 314
Established by the Tamil Nadu government in 1969 to examine centre–state relations and propose constitutional amendments to secure greater state autonomy.
Important for questions on commissions and federalism in India; connects to debates on decentralisation, state autonomy, and later commissions (Sarkaria), and enables comparative questions on recommendations versus central government responses.
- Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth(7th ed.) > Chapter 15: Centre-State Relations > Rajamannar Committee > p. 158
- Laxmikanth, M. Indian Polity. 7th ed., McGraw Hill. > Chapter 15: Centre State Relations > Rajamannar Committee > p. 158
Advocated omission of Articles 356, 357 and 365 and removal of the provision that state ministries hold office during the governor's pleasure.
Directly relevant for exam items on President's Rule, misuse of Article 356, and reforms to governor's discretionary powers; helps frame essay/short-note answers on abuse of central power and institutional reforms.
- Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth(7th ed.) > Chapter 15: Centre-State Relations > Rajamannar Committee > p. 159
Sarkaria recommended that appointments of Governors should be strictly non‑partisan.
High yield for questions on centre–state relations and constitutional conventions; helps distinguish constitutional text (qualifications) from normative recommendations and evaluate controversies about Governor appointments. Useful for essay and polity mains answers and for MCQs on Sarkaria recommendations.
- Indian Constitution at Work, Political Science Class XI (NCERT 2025 ed.) > Chapter 7: FEDERALISM > Role of Governors and President's Rule > p. 166
The Punchhi Commission (2007) recommended that the Governor should NOT be the Chancellor of State Universities—a highly relevant point for current affairs that hasn't been asked directly yet.
Use 'Tone Analysis': Rajamannar (State-appointed committee) usually made radical, anti-Centre recommendations (like abolishing Art 356). The statement here is a constructive reform ('how to choose a better person'), which aligns with the balanced approach of the Sarkaria Commission (Centre-appointed). NCRWC (2000) is too late for such a fundamental convention.
Mains GS-2 (Federalism): Use the phrase 'Detached Figure' as the gold standard when criticizing the 'Agent of the Centre' behavior of modern Governors. It is the standard vocabulary for 'Constitutional Morality'.