The correct option is 2 and 3 only.
Explanation
Under Article 75 of the Constitution, the Prime Minister is appointed by the President. While the President is constitutionally bound to appoint the leader of the majority party in the Lok Sabha, "situational discretion" arises when no single party secures a clear majority (hung parliament). This discretion became particularly relevant during the era of coalition politics starting in 1989.
Statement-wise Analysis:
- Statement 1 is Incorrect: The President's role in appointing the Prime Minister is not purely ceremonial. While the President generally acts on aid and advice, the appointment of the Prime Minister in the case of a hung parliament is a specific instance of situational discretion. The President must apply judgment to identify the leader most capable of forming a stable government.
- Statement 2 is Correct: Since the 1989 general elections, India witnessed a prolonged period of fractured mandates where no single party secured an absolute majority. Consequently, Presidents (such as R. Venkataraman, S.D. Sharma, and K.R. Narayanan) had to actively intervene to constitute governments by inviting leaders of the largest single parties or pre-poll alliances to form the government.
- Statement 3 is Correct: In cases where the President appoints a Prime Minister based on discretion during a fractured mandate, it is a standard constitutional convention to ask the leader to prove their majority on the floor of the House (Vote of Confidence) within a specified time frame. This ensures the executive is responsible to the legislature.
Key Takeaway:
The President exercises situational discretion regarding the appointment of the Prime Minister primarily when no party has a clear majority in the Lok Sabha or when an incumbent Prime Minister dies suddenly without an obvious successor.