new delhi governor bl joshi has a tightrope constitutional walk to do in the event the pollsters intense speculation about a fractured mandate in up came true because the supreme court has barred imposition of presidents rule in a state without allowing political parties to explore a coalition even if it were an unholy one if a constitution bench of the apex court disapproved of imposition of presidents rule in a state without giving the political parties the leeway to explore possibilities for cobbling up a coalition that has majority support the centre would be doubly wary of resorting to the extreme constitutional step given its slender majority in the lok sabha and lack of it in the rajya sabha coupled with the known antiarticle 356 stand of key coalition allies trinamool congress and dmk besides government lacks the majority in the rajya sabha and may not be able to enlist the support there even if the bsp votes for the motion for the proclamation to be valid it must be ratified by both houses if the speculated fractured mandate came true in up with no party commanding a majority in the 403member assembly it would present a parallel to the situation that evolved in bihar after the march 2005 assembly polls the assembly was kept in suspended animation till may 22 2005 when the presidents rule was imposed by dissolving the assembly just before the nda with support from breakaway mlas of ljp was all set to stake claim for forming the government this is not an exact parallel with what is likely to evolve in up immediately after tuesday considering that dissolution of the assembly is not an option yet the very same verdict enjoins upon the governor to exhaust all the possibilities of the formation of government it had said the constitution enjoins upon the governor that after the conclusion of elections every possible attempt is made for formation of a popular government representing the will of the people expressed through the electoral process of course it had said that the dissolution of assembly should not be resorted to even on the ground that attempts to form government were not above board if the governor acts to the contrary by creating a situation whereby a party is prevented even to stake a claim and recommends dissolution to achieve that object the only inescapable inference to be drawn is that the exercise of jurisdiction is wholly illegal and unconstitutional it had further said if a political party with the support of other political party or other mlas stakes claim to form a government and satisfies the governor about its majority to form a stable government the governor cannot refuse formation of government and override the majority claim because of his subjective assessment that the majority was cobbled by illegal and unethical means the apex court had said shutting out any political maneuvering from raj bhawans no such power has been vested with the governor such a power would