With Tamil Nadu Governor Rajendra Vishwanath Arlekar going on record that the Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK) has not established the requisite majority support in the State Assembly to form the government, he has as many options as precedents before him to examine. 

On Thursday (May 7, 2026) afternoon, Mr. Arlekar’s office made public this position, after two rounds of meeting over the past two days between the Governor and the TVK’s founder C. Joseph Vijay, whose party had secured 108 seats in the Tamil Nadu Assembly. As Mr. Vijay has been elected from two seats – Perambur and Tiruchi (East) – the party’s tally will effectively be 107.

Letters of support

Some of the parties have begun criticising Mr. Arlekar for insisting on the production of letters of support. Twenty years ago, when the DMK bagged only 96 seats in the 234-member Assembly, it formed the government in Tamil Nadu only with the support of its allies, which accounted for 68 seats. The Hindu, on May 12, 2006, stated that “all the allies have submitted letters supporting the DMK to Governor Surjit Singh Barnala.”

In fact, in April 1999, when the Congress tried to form the government at the Centre after the collapse of the Bharatiya Janata Party-led National Democratic Alliance (NDA) regime, then President of India K.R. Narayanan had sought written assurances of support from the partners of a proposed coalition at the time of ministry-making, which, he had considered, was by then a well-established precedent. His predecessor, S.D. Sharma, who had issued the letter of appointment to Atal Bihari Vajpayee in May 1996 as Prime Minister during their first meeting, changed his approach a few weeks later and insisted on the letters of support when the United Front government, headed by Deve Gowda, was installed. 

He “even went to the extent of securing undertakings on matters related to programmes,” stated this paper’s report on April 19, 1999. Narayanan himself observed the practice in March 1998 when Vajpayee formed the coalition with the help of parties such as the All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (AIADMK). Sharma was severely criticised for his decision to appoint Vajpayee the Prime Minister even before the decision of the Congress to support Mr. Gowda was communicated to the Rashtrapati Bhavan.

Invitation to single-largest party

However, the precedent of inviting the leader of the single-largest party to form the government was created as early as in 1952 when the Congress set up its regime under the leadership of C. Rajagopalachari (CR). In the House of 375 members, the Congress obtained only 152 seats. A surprise inclusion in the CR Cabinet was the Commonweal Party’s leader M.A. Manickavelu Naicker. By the time the Assembly was constituted in early May, the Congress’s strength rose to 165. 

A former official of the Tamil Nadu government, who is well-versed with parliamentary practices and conventions, explains that there is nothing wrong with the Governor seeking letters, but he or she should not carry out a head count. The floor of the House is the best place for any party to demonstrate its strength. At the same time, the Governor cannot be oblivious to the possibility of horse-trading if he or she allows any party, which does not have a majority of its own or with the support of its allies, to form the government.  

As regards the constitution of the new House, the former official adds that the practice in Tamil Nadu is for the Public Department to issue a government order on the formation of the Assembly, on receipt of documents from the Election Commission of India on the results’ declaration, and get it published in the government gazette. 

A DMK-AIADMK coalition

The Governor can also find out from the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) president and the outgoing Chief Minister M.K. Stalin and the AIADMK general secretary Edappadi K. Palaniswami whether either of them, individually or jointly, are in a position to form the government. This assumes significance in the wake of reports of an understanding between the two Dravidian majors. 

There are at least two precedents at the all-India level in support of this option. In July 1979, then President N. Sanjiva Reddi, after Prime Minister Morarji Desai of the Janata party, had separate consultations with leaders of various parliamentary parties to make an assessment as to which of them would be in a position to marshal a durable majority for forming an alternative government at the Centre. It was after Y.B. Chavan, then Leader of Opposition, had conveyed to the President his inability to form the government that an invitation was extended to Charan Singh, the leader of the breakaway Janata group, to form the government. Likewise, in November 1990, then President R. Venkataraman, after being informed by all major parties of their disinclination to form the government subsequent to the fall of the National Front regime headed by V.P. Singh, had asked Chandra Shekhar to form the government.

In case the Governor comes to the conclusion that no government can be formed under the given composition of the Assembly, he can recommend to the Central government the imposition of President’s rule, besides keeping the House in suspended animation, or even dissolution if possible. This was done in Bihar in 2005. 

Notwithstanding these precedents, there have been a number of recommendations and judicial opinions on the issue of the Governor’s role in the appointment of Chief Minister in the case of a hung Assembly. The Commission on Centre-State Relations, in Volume II, states that “the party or combination of parties, which commands the widest support in the Legislative Assembly, should be called upon to form the Government.” Headed by former Chief Justice of India M.M. Punchhi, the panel also goes on to state that “in case no party or pre-poll coalition has a clear majority, the Governor should select the Chief Minister in the order of preference indicated below: a. The group of parties which had pre-poll alliance commanding the largest number; b. The largest single party staking a claim to form the government with the support of others; c. A post-electoral coalition with all partners joining the government. A post-electoral alliance with some parties joining the government and the remaining including independents supporting the government from outside.”