EXPERTS REVIEW #4#Article356

A TALE OF TWO STATES and ARTICLE 356

The incorporation of emergency powers in the Constitution of India was subject to lot of debate and discussion in the Constituent Assembly with regard to its possibility of endangering the federal polity. The Article 356 has always been used to dismiss State Governments where the party in power is not the same as that ruling at the Centre. Since Independence, India has seen 124 cases of the imposition of President’s Rule in different parts of the country.

The use of the same Article is now regulated by the landmark judgment of Supreme Court in the Bommai’s case, which laid down two propositions:

1.      The proclamation issued by the President under Article 356 is subject to judicial review and;

2.     The question of majority should be decided on the floor of the legislature and not in the Raj Bhavan.

The recent developments in Uttarakhand and Arunachal Pradesh have turned the spotlight on the office of the Governor. 

Is bribing a legitimate ground?

• It was perfectly legitimate for Governor K. K. Paul in Uttarakhand to ask former Chief Minister, Harish Rawat to prove his majority in the assembly on March 28, after 9 Congress members broke away from the party. 
• But a day before the floor test was to be held, the Union cabinet held an emergency meeting and advised President Pranab Mukherjee to impose Central rule in the State. 
• What triggered the emergency meeting was the Governor’s report after a sting operation showed Rawat offering money to MLAs for their support. 
• In a fit of great moral outrage, the Centre decided to act quickly. Mukherjee was said to have signed the proclamation when he was shown the video, which was certified as genuine by a forensic lab. 
• This means that President’s rule was imposed on the ground that the Chief Minister had attempted to bribe some legislators for their support.  

Political crisis in Arunachal Pradesh

• On the other side, the north eastern state of Arunachal Pradesh had plunged into political crisis in November 2015 after 21 of the Congress’ legislators of the total 47 had rebelled against then CM Nabam Tuki. 
• The rebellion had reduced the Congress government to 26 legislators (i.e. in minority) in the 60-member assembly. 
• Following the political crisis, the Union Government had imposed President’s rule under Article 356 of Constitution on January 26, 2016. 
• Later the leader of Congress dissidents’ faction, Kalikho Pul, was sworn in as the 9th Chief Minister in February 2016 with support of 20 rebel Congress legislators and 11 BJP legislators.
• The Supreme Court has ordered the restoration of former Chief Minister Nabam Tuki’s Congress Government in Arunachal Pradesh.

First Time in Indian History:

• Supreme Court has quashed the Governor's decision and restored a State Government that had been dismissed by the Centre under the President’s rule.

With the Supreme Court driving the return of Congress Governments in two states in less than three months, the BJP government at the Centre has earned the dubious distinction of having been pushed back on the imposition of President’s Rule is perhaps the quickest succession in Indian judicial history.

ABOUT THE WRITER:

Ms. Shikha Dhiman under the aegis of Prof. Rattan Singh is pursuing LL.M. from the University Institute of Legal Studies, Panjab University. She has obtained her LL.B. and B.Com. degree from Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar and APJ College, Jalandhar respectively. She is a learned writer who looks forward to join the teaching profession. She is grateful to Prof. Rattan Singh for his continuance guidance and support, and providing her with an opportunity to publish her article, 'Sampling in Legal Research' in his book titled, 'Legal Research Methodology'.