president rule
Radhika.R
(Querist) 08 January 2011
This query is : Resolved
brief me on state emergency
Gulshan Tanwar
(Expert) 08 January 2011
Art.256, Art. 365 and Art.356 comes into action for the same and also Art. 19(2)-19(6).
256. The executive power of every State shall be so exercised as to ensure compliance with the laws made by Parliament and any existing laws which apply in that State, and the executive power of the Union shall extend to the giving of such directions to a State as may appear to the Government of India to be necessary for that purpose.
356. (1) If the President, on receipt of a report from the Governor 1*** of a State or otherwise, is satisfied that a situation has arisen in which the Government of the State cannot be carried on in accordance with the provisions of this Constitution, the President may by Proclamation—
(a) assume to himself all or any of the functions of the Government of the State and all or any of the powers vested in or exercisable by the Governor 2***
or any body or authority in the State other than the Legislature of the State;
(b) declare that the powers of the Legislature of the State shall be exercisable by or under the authority of Parliament;
(c) make such incidental and consequential
provisions as appear to the President to be necessary or desirable for giving effect to the objects of the Proclamation, including provisions for suspending in whole or in part the operation of any provisions of this Constitution relating to any body or authority in the State:
Provided that nothing in this clause shall authorise the President to assume to himself any of the powers vested in or exercisable by a High Court, or to suspend in whole or in part the operation of any provision of this Constitution relating to High Courts.
(2) Any such Proclamation may be revoked or varied by a subsequent Proclamation.
(3) Every Proclamation under this article shall be laid before each House of Parliament and shall, except where it is a Proclamation revoking a previous
Proclamation, cease to operate at the expiration of two months unless before the expiration of that period it has been approved by resolutions of both Houses of Parliament:
Provided that if any such Proclamation (not being a Proclamation revoking a previous Proclamation) is issued at a time when the House of the People is dissolved or the dissolution of the House of the People takes place during the period of two months referred to in this clause, and if a resolution approving the Proclamation has been passed by the Council of States, but no resolution with
respect to such Proclamation has been passed by the House of the People before the expiration of that period, the Proclamation shall cease to operate at the expiration of thirty days from the date on which the House of the People first sits after its reconstitution unless before the expiration of the said period of thirty days a resolution approving the Proclamation has been also passed by the
House of the People.
(4) A Proclamation so approved shall, unless revoked, cease to operate on the expiration of a period of 1[six months from the date of issue of the Proclamation]:
Provided that if and so often as a resolution approving the continuance in force of such a Proclamation is passed by both Houses of Parliament, the Proclamation shall, unless revoked, continue in force for a further period of 2[six months] from the date on which under this clause it would otherwise have ceased to operate, but no such Proclamation shall in any case remain in force for more
than three years:
Provided further that if the dissolution of the House of the People takes place during any such period of 1[six months] and a resolution approving the continuance in force of such Proclamation has been passed by the Council of States, but no resolution with respect to the continuance in force of such Proclamation has been passed by the House of the People during the said period, the Proclamation shall cease to operate at the expiration of
thirty days from the date on which the House of the People first sits after its reconstitution unless before the expiration of the said period of thirty days a resolution approving the continuance in force of the Proclamation has been also passed by the House of the People:
2[Provided also that in the case of the Proclamation issued under clause (1) on the 11th day of May, 1987 with respect to the State of Punjab, the reference in the first proviso to this clause to “three years” shall be construed as a reference to 3[five years].]
4[(5) Notwithstanding anything contained in clause (4), a resolution with respect to the continuance in force of a Proclamation approved under clause (3) for any period beyond the expiration of one year from the date of issue of such Proclamation shall not be passed by either House of Parliament unless—
(a) a Proclamation of Emergency is in operation, in the whole of India or, as the case may be, in the whole or any part of the State, at the time of the passing of such resolution, and (b) the Election Commission certifies that the continuance in force of the Proclamation approved under clause (3) during the period specified in such resolution is necessary on account of difficulties in holding general elections to the Legislative Assembly of the State concerned:]
1[Provided that nothing in this clause shall apply to the Proclamation issued under clause (1) on the 11th day of May, 1987 with respect to the State of Punjab.]
365. Where any State has failed to comply with, or to give effect to, any directions given in the exercise of the executive power of the Union under any of the provisions of this Constitution, it shall be lawful for the President to hold that a situation has arisen in which the Government of the State cannot be carried on in accordance with the provisions of this Constitution.
Art.19(2) Nothing in sub-clause (a) of clause (1) shall affect the operation of any existing law, or prevent the State from making any law, in so far as such law imposes reasonable restrictions on the exercise of the right conferred by the said sub-clause in the interests of 4[the sovereignty and integrity of India,] the security of the State, friendly relations with foreign States, public order, decency or morality, or in relation to contempt of court, defamation or incitement to an offence.]
(3) Nothing in sub-clause (b) of the said clause shall affect the operation of any existing law in so far as it imposes, or prevent the State from making any law imposing, in the interests of 4[the sovereignty and integrity of India or] public order, reasonable restrictions on the exercise of the right conferred by the said sub-clause.
(4) Nothing in sub-clause (c) of the said clause shall affect the operation of any existing law in so far as it imposes, or prevent the State from making any law imposing, in the interests of 4[the sovereignty and Protection of certain rights regarding freedom of speech, etc.
1Ins. by the Constitution (Forty-fourth Amendment) Act, 1978, s. 2 (w.e.f. 20-6-1979).
2Sub-clause (f) omitted by s. 2, ibid. (w.e.f. 20-6-1979).
3Subs. by the Constitution (First Amendment) Act, 1951, s. 3, for cl. (2) (with retrospective effect). 4Ins. by the Constitution (Sixteenth Amendment) Act, 1963, s. 2. integrity of India or] public order or morality, reasonable restrictions on the exercise of the right conferred by the said sub-clause.
(5) Nothing in 1[sub-clauses (d) and (e)] of the said clause shall affect the operation of any existing law in so far as it imposes, or prevent the State from making any law imposing, reasonable restrictions on the exercise of any of the rights conferred by the said sub-clauses either in the interests of the general public or for the protection of the interests of any Scheduled Tribe.
(6) Nothing in sub-clause (g) of the said clause shall affect the operation of any existing law in so far as it imposes, or prevent the State from making any law imposing, in the interests of the general public, reasonable restrictions on the exercise of the right conferred by the said sub-clause, and, in particular, 2[nothing in the said sub-clause shall affect the operation of any existing law in so far as it relates to, or prevent the State from making
any law relating to,—
(i) the professional or technical qualifications necessary for practising any profession or carrying on any occupation, trade or business, or
(ii) the carrying on by the State, or by a corporation owned or controlled by the State, of any trade, business, industry or service, whether to the exclusion, complete or partial, of citizens or
otherwise].
Gulshan Tanwar
(Expert) 08 January 2011
Whenever the State Machinery doesnt obeys the Supreme Parliament or doesnt works in consonance with the spirits of the Constitution or the upon the Letter from the Governor or Lieutenant Governor or Administrator the President with the approval of the GoM and also in consultation with the Supreme Court
"(Art.143 - 143. (1) If at any time it appears to the President that a question of law or fact has arisen, or is likely to arise, which is of such a nature and of such public importance that it is expedient to obtain the opinion of the Supreme Court upon it, he may refer the question to that Court for consideration and the Court may, after such hearing as it
thinks fit, report to the President its opinion thereon.
(2) The President may, notwithstanding anything in 2*** the proviso to article 131, refer a dispute of the kind
mentioned in the 3[said proviso] to the Supreme Court for opinion and the Supreme Court shall, after such hearing as it thinks fit, report to the President its opinion thereon.)"
may issue President rule in the state concerned. Even you can read Art.352-360 in this regard for proper knowledge of the same.
Gulshan Tanwar
(Expert) 08 January 2011
And also in this circumstance the Unitary feature of the Indian Parliament can be seen.
It is neither federal nor Unitary but a combination of both.
Radhika.R
(Querist) 12 January 2011
Thank u so much sir for your valuable advice. The constitutional machinery of a state fails only if it doesnt obey the union government or there are other grounds also? If members are disqualified can that be taken as failure of constitutional machinery?
DEFENSE ADVOCATE.-firmaction@g
(Expert) 08 January 2011
