[1] Oscar Lobo: I was asked "Why do we have a Sikh as the Governor of Goa? Don't we have reputable Goans left in Goa for this position?
(Response from Marshall): As per the Constitution or maybe practice .... persons from the same state CANNOT be appointed as Governors. However, a few days ago Frederick posted a news item that the head of the State Human Rights Commission was a retired justice from Bihar.This I am not able to fathom why a person from Bihar needed to be appointed in Goa. [2] Vasant Baliga: There is no Constitutional Bar on any person being appointed as Governor of any state. == jc COMMENT: While Oscar is making a good point about the Bihar's HRC head, I suggest that there is a distinct difference between an orange and a koala bear. Vasant Baliga is correct about the absence of any Constitutional bar to the appointment of in-State Governors. By convention, the Governor is appointed from another State, ostensibly &/or ideally, to avoid any local political entanglement and to promote a detached objectivity to the Governor's actions. (Pylee's Constitutional Government of India 1984). What effectively happens is that Governorships are given to politicians aligned to the party in power at the centre for one of three reasons (a) to get the politicians out of his (home) State's political competition (b) as a paid-luxury holiday for long service (if one can use that term wrt politicians); (c) difficult State and no one wishes to go there. No prizes for correct answer as to which category Punjab belonged to during the "troubles", and which category Goa continues to belong to. On the topic of "objectivity and politicians", I am out of words! jc