Read on Twitter
Art. 356..
S. R. Bommai v. Union of India a landmark judgment of Supreme Court, where Court discussed at length provisions of Art 356 of the Constitution and related issues. The case had huge impact on Centre-State Relations. it attempted to curb blatant misuse of Article 356
S. R. Bommai v. Union of India a landmark judgment of Supreme Court, where Court discussed at length provisions of Art 356 of the Constitution and related issues. The case had huge impact on Centre-State Relations. it attempted to curb blatant misuse of Article 356
Article 356 deals with imposition of President's Rule over a State. When the state is under President's Rule, the elected state government is dismissed and Council of ministers is suspended and administration is directed by the Governor.
The Governor being an appointee of the President thus, effectively, a functionary of the Union Government.Thus imposition of President's Rule negates ...
...the federal character of the Indian political system, where administration usually is shared between the Union and State governments. It also militates against the democratic doctrine of popular sovereignty, since an elected government is suspended. ....
..These reasons have made use of Article 356 controversial. Nevertheless, it was used repeatedly by previous congress governments to suspend state governments (of opposite political parties) based on genuine reasons or trumped-up excuses.[
The Principles laid down by Supreme Court..
The SC laid down certain guidelines so as to prevent the misuse of Article 356 of the constitution.
1. The majority enjoyed by the Council of Ministers shall be tested on the floor of the House....
The SC laid down certain guidelines so as to prevent the misuse of Article 356 of the constitution.
1. The majority enjoyed by the Council of Ministers shall be tested on the floor of the House....
Centre should give a warning to the state and a time period of one week to reply.
2. The court cannot question the advice tendered by the CoMs to the President but it can question the material behind the satisfaction of the President. Hence, Judicial Review will....
2. The court cannot question the advice tendered by the CoMs to the President but it can question the material behind the satisfaction of the President. Hence, Judicial Review will....
involve three questions only:
a. Is there any material behind the proclamation
b. Is the material relevant.
c. Was there any malafide use of power.
If there is improper use of Article 356 then the court will provide remedy.
a. Is there any material behind the proclamation
b. Is the material relevant.
c. Was there any malafide use of power.
If there is improper use of Article 356 then the court will provide remedy.
Under Article 356(3) it is the limitation on the powers of the President. Hence, the president shall not take any irreversible action until the proclamation is approved by the Parliament i.e. he shall not dissolve the assembly.
Article 356 is justified only when ....
Article 356 is justified only when ....
* there is a breakdown of constitutional machinery and not administrative machinery
*Article 356 shall be used sparingly by the center, otherwise it is likely to destroy the constitutional structure between the center and the states....
*Article 356 shall be used sparingly by the center, otherwise it is likely to destroy the constitutional structure between the center and the states....
Based on the report of the Sarkaria Commission on Centre–state Relations(1988), the Supreme Court in Bommai case (1994) enlisted the situations where the exercise of power under Article 356 could be proper or improper.....
Imposition of President’s Rule in a state would be proper in the following situations:
1. Where after general elections to the assembly, no party secures a majority, that is, Hung Assembly.
2. Where the party having a majority in the assembly declines to form a ministry and ...
1. Where after general elections to the assembly, no party secures a majority, that is, Hung Assembly.
2. Where the party having a majority in the assembly declines to form a ministry and ...
the governor cannot find a coalition ministry commanding a majority in the assembly.
3. Where a ministry resigns after its defeat in the assembly and no other party is willing or able to form a ministry commanding a majority in the assembly.
4. Where a constitutional direction..
3. Where a ministry resigns after its defeat in the assembly and no other party is willing or able to form a ministry commanding a majority in the assembly.
4. Where a constitutional direction..
of the Central government is disregarded by the state government.
5. Internal subversion where, for example, a government is deliberately acting against the Constitution and the law or is fomenting a violent revolt....
5. Internal subversion where, for example, a government is deliberately acting against the Constitution and the law or is fomenting a violent revolt....
Physical breakdown where the government willfully refuses to discharge its constitutional obligations endangering the security of the state.
6. The imposition of President’s Rule in a state would be improper under the following situations:
6. The imposition of President’s Rule in a state would be improper under the following situations:
i. Where a ministry resigns or is dismissed on losing majority support in the assembly and the governor recommends imposition of President’s Rule without probing the possibility of forming an alternative ministry....
ii Where the governor makes his own assessment of the support of a ministry in the assembly and recommends imposition of President’s Rule without allowing the ministry to prove its majority on the floor of the Assembly.
iii. Where the ruling party enjoying majority support in the assembly has suffered a massive defeat in the general elections to the Lok Sabha such as in 1977 and 1980.
iv. Internal disturbances not amounting to internal subversion or physical breakdown.
iv. Internal disturbances not amounting to internal subversion or physical breakdown.
v. Maladministration in the state or allegations of corruption against the ministry or stringent financial exigencies of the state.
vi. Where the state government is not given prior warning to rectify itself except in case of extreme urgency leading to disastrous consequences.
vi. Where the state government is not given prior warning to rectify itself except in case of extreme urgency leading to disastrous consequences.
vii. Where the power is used to sort out intra-party problems of the ruling party, or for a purpose extraneous or irrelevant to the one for which it has been conferred by the Constitution.
viii. While dealing with the question as to whether the Presidential Proclamation under Article 356 was justiciable all the judges were unanimous in holding that the presidential proclamation was justiciable.
The Supreme Court held that the proclamation under Article 356(1) is not immune from judicial review. The validity of the Proclamation issued by the President under Article 356(1) is judicially reviewable to the extent of examining whether it was...
issued on the basis of any material at all or whether the material was relevant or whether the Proclamation was issued in the malafide exercise of the power. The Supreme Court or the High court can strike down the proclamation if it is found...
..to be malafide or based on wholly irrelevant or extraneous grounds. The deletion of Clause (5) by the 44th Amendment Act, removes the cloud on the reviewability of the action. When a prima facie case is made out in the challenge to the ...
Proclamation, the Union of India has to produce the material on the basis of which action was taken. It cannot refuse to do so, if it seeks to defend the action. (END)
