Presidents Rule / State Emergency (Article 356) - Emergency Provisions
Under Article 356, the President may issue a proclamation to impose State Emergency if he is
satisfied on receipt of a report from the Governor of the State, or otherwise, that a situation has
arisen under which the Government of the State cannot be carried on smoothly. In such a
situation, the proclamation of emergency by the President is called ‘proclamation on account of
the failure (or breakdown) of constitutional machinery’. This is famously known as President's
Rule. The UPSC Indian Polity and Governance Syllabus include President Rule - Emergency
Provisions which is discussed in this article.
President Rule
The Constitution of India is an instrument that provides for a federal set-up in the country and
also specifies definite functions for central and state governments.
The jurisdiction of the central and state government with regard to the law-making process has
been explicitly mentioned in Schedule 7 of the Constitution.
However, there are certain circumstances through which the central government can enter the
jurisdiction of states and the Presidential proclamation of emergency is one of them.
The framers of the Constitution were conscious that, in a country of sub-continental dimensions,
immense diversities, socio-economic disparities and “multitudinous people, with possibly divided
loyalties,” security of the nation and stability of its polity could not be taken for granted.
The framers, therefore, recognized that, in a grave emergency, the Union must have adequate
powers to deal quickly and effectively with a threat to the very existence of the nation, on
account of external aggression or internal disruption.
Grounds of declaration
President Rule - Grounds of Declaration
According to Article 355, “it shall be the duty of the Union to protect every State against external
aggression and internal disturbance and to ensure that the government of every State is carried
on in accordance with the provision of this constitution”.
Article 356 says that if the president, on receipt of a report from the Governor of a State or
otherwise, is satisfied that a situation has arisen in which the Government of State cannot be
carried on in accordance with the provision of this constitution.
Parliamentary Approval And Duration Of President Rule
Like National Emergency, such a proclamation must also be placed before both the Houses of
Parliament for its approval.
In this case, approval must be given within two months; otherwise, the proclamation ceases to
operate.
If during these two months, the Lok Sabha is dissolved and the Rajya Sabha has approved it,
then, the proclamation shall cease to operate on the expiration of thirty days from the date on
which the Lok Sabha first sits after its reconstitution, unless it is approved by the Lok Sabha
before the expiration of this period.
A proclamation so approved shall, unless revoked, cease to operate on the expiration of a
period of six months from the date of issue of the proclamation.
Unless revoked, its life can be extended by six months each, several times, but in no case
beyond three years. Thereafter, the President’s Rule must come to an end, and the normal
constitutional machinery must be restored in the State.
The 44th Amendment introduced a new provision to put restraint on the power of Parliament to
extend a proclamation issued under Article 356 beyond one year.
Revocation of President rule
Revocation Of President Rule
Any such Proclamation may be revoked or varied by a subsequent Proclamation.
It can be revoked by the President only on his own.
A proclamation issued under Article 356(1) expires in any of the following modes:
After two months of its making, it is not presented for approval before both Houses of the
Parliament [Article 356(3)].
Even before two months, if the proclamation on presentation to the Houses of Parliament fails to
get approval from any House [Article 356(3)].
After 6 months from the date of the proclamation, in case no further resolution is passed by the
House of Parliament after the passage of the initial resolution approving the said proclamation
[Article 356(4)].
After the expiry of 6 months from the passage of the last resolutions of approval passed by the
House of Parliament subject to an overall maximum limit of 3 years from the date of the
proclamation. Continuance of the proclamation beyond one year is subject to the fulfillment of
the conditions laid down in Article 356(5):
A National Emergency is already in operation; or if
The Election Commission certifies that the election to the State Assembly cannot be held.
The date on which the President issues a proclamation of revocation [Article 356(2)].
Effects of President rule
Effects Of President Rule
The declaration of emergency due to the breakdown of Constitutional machinery in a State has
the following effects:
The President can assume to himself all or any of the functions of the State Government or he
may vest all or any of those functions with the Governor or any other executive authority.
The President may dissolve the State Legislative Assembly or put it under suspension. He may
authorize the Parliament to make laws on behalf of the State Legislature.
The President can make any other incidental or consequential provision necessary to give effect
to the object of proclamation.
The President is not, however, authorized to assume the powers of the High Court or to
suspend any constitutional provision pertaining to it.
It has no effect on the Fundamental Rights of the citizens.
Use and Miuse of article 356
Use And Misuse Of Article 356
Dr. B.R. Ambedkar had hoped that Article 356 would be a dead letter. However, experience has
shown that Article 356 has become a deadly weapon.
First used in 1951 (Punjab) it has been used more than 100 times since then.
In 1992 President rule was imposed in Madhya Pradesh, Himachal Pradesh, and Rajasthan in
the context of which the Supreme Court in 1994 issued guidelines in the judgment S.R Bommai
vs Union of India (9 Judge Bench).
Although the 38th constitutional amendment act had made presidential satisfaction immune to
judicial review. The 44th Constitutional amendment act made the same subject to judicial
review.
President Rule- Subject To Judicial Review
It was in this context that guidelines were issued in the Bommai Judgement. These guidelines
are:
Presidential satisfaction is subject to judicial review which means that the court can examine the
material basis of presidential satisfaction.
The court will not examine the correctness or adequacy of the material but only its relevance.
Further, the court may also examine any malafide or perversity in the order of the president and
whether it is based on any extraneous consideration.
Further, the burden is on the Union to show that there are relevant materials available for
presidential satisfaction.
To test the confidence of the government in the assembly, subjective assessment of the
governor is not the correct test, rather floor test is the correct test which means voting should be
conducted on the floor of the house to test the majority.
The time for the dismal of the council is the period after the floor test. Similarly, the time for the
resolution of the assembly is after approval by parliament.
If the council has been wrongly dismissed and in the floor test majority is proved then the
council should be restored. Similarly, if the assembly has been wrongly dissolved and the
parliament does not approve president rule then the assembly should be restored.
If at any time the court finds that the council was wrongly dismissed or assembly wrongly
dissolved or proclamation was unconstitutional then council as well as assembly should be
restored.
Conclusion
It impacts the federal shape of the nation, basically turns it into a unitary one while it seeks to
safeguard the interests of the nation and the people.
Although suspension of fundamental Rights has been built-in over and over attempted to be
justified, we think that they're the simplest to the very existence of the residents in a democracy.
Even with the protection measures that had been introduced through the 44th Amendment Act,
there may nonetheless be chances for the unjust violation of fundamental rights.
Therefore, as there's a provision in the other federal constitutions such as Australia and Canada
the courts should accept the power to conform to the volume the Centre can expand its powers,
as it will act as a mechanism to check the arbitrary use of the discretionary powers available
beneath the emergency provisions to the parliament and the executive.
