The Governor's discretion in appointing the Chief Minister and Council of Ministers is final and cannot be called into question in a writ proceeding.

In this application the petitioner prays for a Writ of quo warranto directing respondent 3 to vacate the office of the Chief Minister of Assam and respondents 4 to 2 to vacate the offices of the Council of Ministers and a Writ in the nature of mandamus for declaration that the order of appointments of the Chief Minister and the Council of Ministers appointed by the Governor of Assam under Art. 164 of the Constitution as illegal, unconstitutional and invalid. He prays for a declaration that he is the Chief Minister of Assam and he should be allowed to resume his office to exercise his powers and discharge the duties of the Chief Minister.

2. An apercu of the petitioners case may be summed up as follows:-

The petitioner is an M.L.A. on 4-9-1979 the then Ministry resigned in face of a no-confidence motion whereupon the Governor of Assam being satisfied that the petitioner enjoyed the confidence of, the majority of the Members of the Assam Legislative Assembly, hereinafter referred as "the Assembly", appointed him Chief Minister. He was sworn in and he formed his Council of Ministers who were appointed on his advice; a no-confidence motion was tabled against his Ministry but the motion was withdrawn and/or not pressed. "The Assembly" was prorogued by the Governor on 11-9-1979. The petitioner claims that his Ministry continued to aid and advise the Governor and performed their duties as required by and under the Constitution. However by a notification No. GSR 6/88 (E) dated 12th Dec, 1979 the President of India imposed Presidential Rule in Assam under Art.356 of the Constitution on the basis of a report from the Governor of Assam andother information and being satisfied that a situation had arisen in which the Government of the State could notbe carried on in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution; the operation of the Arts.163, 164 and 174(1) was suspended. The petitioner states that there did not exist any situation which called for imposition of the Proclamation. However, the petitioner was enjoying a comfortable majority in the Legislature at all relevant time. By a notification No. GSR/684/(E) dated 6th December, 1980 the President revoked the Proclamation issued on 12-12-79. "

The petitioner states that the Presidential Rule was imposed to ensure that the Government of the State might be carried on in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution. The petitioner claims that he was holding the office of the Chief Minister on the date of the issuance of the Proclamation as well as on the date of revocation of the Proclamation on revocation of the Proclamation he was entitled to hold the office. Notwithstanding his right to continue in the office the Governor by notifications dated 6th Dec., 1980 appointed respondent 3 as Chief Minister and respondents 4 to 8 as Ministers and later appointed respondents 9to 12 as Ministers, under Article 164 of the Constitution. Being aggrieved the petitioner made a representation to the Governor requesting him, (i) to call upon the Chief Minister to resign; (ii) on dismissal of the Ministry headed by respondent 3 reinstate his Ministry "after the reconstitution of the cabinet" and (iii) not to allow respondent 3 to exercise powers and functions of the Chief Minister.

3. Dr. J.C. Medhi appearing on behalf of the petitioner has contended, (i) that there did not exist any situation which called for the Presidential Rule; (ii) that the petitioner never resigned from the office of the Chief Minister nor was he dismissed and as such the petitioner continued to be the Chief Minister immediately after the Proclamation was revoked. Therefore, without dismissing the petitioner the Governor could not have appointed respondent 3 Chief Minister and respondents 4 to 12 Council of Ministers; (iii) that the petitioner had a comfortable majority in the Assembly having 126 seats. Respondent 3 belongs to Congress (1) and her party could secure only 8 seats in the Assembly. As such, the