NEW DELHI: Actor-politician Vijay is set to meet Tamil Nadu governor Rajendra Vishwanath Arlekar for the third time to stake claim to form government, after the May 4 verdict placed his TVK as the single-largest party in the state.From silver-screen superstardom to the edge of Chennai’s Fort St George, Vijay has caused the biggest political disruption Tamil Nadu has seen in decades. His two-year-old party, Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam, stormed into the assembly with 108 seats, shattering the long-standing DMK-AIADMK dominance that has defined the state’s politics for nearly half a century.The “Thalapathy wave” rattled seasoned Dravidian veterans such as MK Stalin, O Panneerselvam and Edappadi K Palaniswami. At 51, Vijay transformed from political newcomer to the single-largest force in Tamil Nadu almost overnight, winning both the seats he contested, Perambur and Tiruchirapalli East.Yet, despite the historic debut, the final leap to power has hit a constitutional wall.TVK’s tally of 108 seats, even with the support of five Congress MLAs, leaves the alliance at 112, still six short of the magical majority mark of 118 in the 234-member assembly.

And that gap has now become the centre of Tamil Nadu’s newest political and constitutional showdown.

Governor’s pause triggers fresh political storm

The big TVK numbers did not impress governor Rajendra Vishwanath Arlekar to make call to party’s boss Vijay, keeping him away from power.Tamil Nadu governor Arlekar cited “unestablished majority” as the only key reason, causing constitutional stalemate situation for superstar Vijay against the traditional gatekeepers of power in state.According to news agency PTI sources, Arlekar called Vijay to Lok Bhavan and sought clarity on the “magic number” required for government formation. He reportedly asked TVK to furnish details of legislators backing its claim.The governor’s stance immediately triggered sharp reactions from TVK leaders and opposition voices, many accusing Raj Bhavan of deliberately stalling the process.State Congress in-charge Girish Chodankar alleged that the governor was “bowing” to the BJP rather than to the Constitution. Senior advocate and former Congress leader Kapil Sibal accused the governor of “buying time” to facilitate political manoeuvring.“I was hoping that by now the governor would have invited TVK to form the government… When governors become agents of the BJP, they do the bidding of the BJP,” Sibal said.

Meanwhile, AIADMK national spokesperson Kovai Sathyan defended the governor’s stand and attacked TVK’s claims.“TVK is the one that gave a confession, claiming that we are the single largest party with 108 seats, and we have the support of 5 more. So, the Governor is duty-bound to ask, ‘Where are the other 5?” Sathyan said.

Can Governor insist on proof before invitation?

The central constitutional question now dominating Tamil Nadu politics is simple: Can a governor ask a party to prove majority even before inviting it to form the government?Senior advocate and former president of Delhi high court bar association, Kirti Uppal told TOI that there is no absolute constitutional rule requiring the governor to first invite the single-largest party.“There is no constitutional rule or absolute right that the single largest party must be invited first. “Single largest party” is a political convention, not a binding constitutional mandate,” Uppal said.He pointed to Article 163(2) of the Constitution, which gives the governor discretionary powers in certain circumstances.“163(2): If any question arises whether any matter is or is not a matter as respects which the Governor is by or under this Constitution required to act in his discretion, the decision of the governor in his discretion shall be final, and the validity of anything done by the Governor shall not be called in question on the ground that he ought or ought not to have acted in his discretion.”Uppal further argued that a floor test remains the ultimate democratic method to determine majority.“The governor can order a floor test at any time, whether it is before the government. formation or during the tenure of the ministry. Ultimately, the floor test is considered the supreme democratic method to test the majority of the government on the floor of the house,” he added.However, another Supreme Court advocate Vivek Narayan Sharma offered a sharply different interpretation.“Governor cannot insist on a floor test before inviting a party to form the government. A floor test is constitutionally meant to test the majority of a government that has already been appointed, not to determine who gets appointed in the first place,” the advocate told TOI.“The governor’s role at the invitation stage is only prima facie satisfaction, not conclusive adjudication. The Governor may make a prima facie inquiry through letters of support or coalition claims, but cannot insist on a ‘prove majority first, then I will appoint you’ approach as if Raj Bhavan itself were the floor of the House.”

What Constitution and Supreme Court say

The debate over the governor’s powers in hung assemblies is not new.Under Article 164(1), the Constitution says the chief minister is appointed by the governor, but it does not specify the order in which parties or alliances must be invited.Constitutional experts say the governor’s role is to objectively determine who appears most capable of commanding the confidence of the house. That could be:

A major precedent emerged after the 2017 Goa assembly election. Congress emerged as the single-largest party, but then governor Mridula Sinha invited the BJP after it secured support letters from allies and demonstrated majority support.When the matter reached the Supreme Court in Chandrakant Kavlekar v Union of India, the court did not overturn the governor’s decision. Instead, it ordered an immediate floor test.Similar situations surfaced in 2017 Manipur assembly election and 2018 Meghalaya assembly election, where Congress emerged as the single-largest party but BJP-backed coalitions were invited because they demonstrated better majority numbers.The constitutional debate intensified during the 2018 Karnataka government formation controversy and the 2019 Maharashtra government formation crisis, where questions over governors’ discretion reached the Supreme Court.Karnataka in 2018, when the BJP emerged as the single-largest party with 104 seats but was short of majority.The Congress and JD(S) quickly formed a post-poll alliance and claimed they had enough numbers to form the government.Despite this, then governor Vajubhai Vala invited BJP leader BS Yediyurappa to form the government first and asked him to prove majority in the assembly.The move sparked a constitutional controversy and reached the Supreme Court. The court ordered an immediate floor test. Before the vote could happen, Yediyurappa resigned as he could not gather enough support. The Congress-JD(S) alliance later formed the government under HD Kumaraswamy.Another landmark case often cited is Rameshwar Prasad v Union of India. The Supreme Court observed that preference generally goes to a claimant capable of demonstrating majority support, such as a coalition, before a single-largest party lacking numbers.The court also clarified that governors cannot reject majority claims merely based on suspicion about how alliances were formed.

TVK races for numbers as allies deliberate

As the situation carries on with constitutional weight, TVK has put more efforts to gather from smaller parties, like VCK and Left, both having 2 members each.TVK joint general secretary CTR Nirmal Kumar met leaders of the Communist Party of India in Chennai seeking support for a “progressive government”.

CPI leader M Veerapandiyan confirmed that Vijay had formally written to the party seeking support and said an emergency executive meeting had been called.Thol Thirumavalavan has also urged the governor to invite Vijay to form the government and prove his majority on the assembly floor.Meanwhile, CPM general secretary MA Baby questioned the delay in the governor’s invitation and said the party would take a final call after consultations with the DMK.

Congress-DMK ties under strain

The political churn has also shaken one of Tamil Nadu’s oldest alliances.Congress’s decision to back TVK has deeply strained its relationship with the DMK, with DMK leaders accusing Congress of betrayal, tagging the party as “backstabbers.”The DMK legislature party passed a resolution condemning Congress’s “sudden political shift”, while party leaders pointed out that Congress had benefited electorally from the alliance in previous elections.DMK MP Kalanidhi Veeraswamy claimed TVK was “desperate” and alleged that Congress may have switched sides after promises of ministerial positions.

Beyond numbers, a larger federalism debate

The standoff has once again revived Tamil Nadu’s long-running tensions with the governor’s office and broader questions about country’s federalism.The debate echoes recent observations by Supreme Court judge Justice BV Nagarathna, who said states are “not subordinate to the Centre, but coordinate units within the constitutional scheme.”

The Tamil Nadu deadlock not merely seen as a numbers game, but as part of a larger national debate over gubernatorial discretion, cooperative federalism and the balance of power between elected governments and constitutional offices.Vijay has already transformed Tamil Nadu politics. Whether he can now cross the final gubernatorial hurdle and turn disruption into government is the question that could define the state’s next political era.