- It laid down the scope of Article 356 of the Constitution and defined certain restrictions on its use.
- Under Article 356, President's Rule can be imposed on any state on the grounds of the failure of the constitutional machinery.
- Proclamation for President’s Rule must be approved by both houses of Parliament within two months, or it ceases to exist.
- Further, such proclamation requires approval every six months for continuance.
- Background of the case:
- In 1989, Karnataka Governor had recommended to the President to impose President’s Rule after withdrawal of support to ruling party by 19 MLAs.
- The case went to SC, which also reviewed similar cases in Meghalaya, Nagaland, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan and Himachal Pradesh.
- Key Highlights of the judgement
- President’s power to dismiss a state government is not absolute and subject to judicial review on grounds of illegality, malafide, extraneous considerations, abuse of power, or fraud.
- It overruled State of Rajasthan Vs Union of India (1977) judgement.
- President can dissolve the state legislative assembly only after approval of proclamation by the Parliament.
- Till then, state Legislative Assembly can be suspended.
- Suspended government would be automatically reinstated, if parliamentary approval is not obtained within 2 months.
- President’s power to dismiss a state government is not absolute and subject to judicial review on grounds of illegality, malafide, extraneous considerations, abuse of power, or fraud.
Significance of the Judgement
|