President Rule: Grounds, Duration & Legal Scrutiny

In a significant political development, the Ministry of Home Affairs has imposed President’s Rule in Manipur following the resignation of Chief Minister N. Biren Singh on February 9. The decision was taken under Article 356 of the Indian Constitution, which empowers the President to assume direct control of a state’s administration in case of a breakdown of constitutional machinery. This article explores its constitutional provisions, grounds of imposition, parliamentary approval, impact, judicial scrutiny, key recommendations, and criticisms.

1. Constitutional Provisions

President’s Rule is governed by Articles 355 to 357 in Part XVIII and Article 365 in Part XIX of the Constitution.

• Article 355: The Union is responsible for protecting states against external aggression and internal disturbances.
• Article 356: The President can assume state governance if its constitutional machinery fails.
• Article 357: The President is empowered to legislate for the state by ordinance if necessary.
• Article 365: If a state fails to comply with Union directives, the President can assume it cannot function per the Constitution.

2. Grounds for Imposition

President’s Rule can be imposed under two primary conditions,

(1) Breakdown of Constitutional Machinery (Article 356)

• The Governor’s report or President’s discretion confirms governance failure.
• The state government fails to function in accordance with the Constitution.

(2) Failure to Follow the Centre’s Directions (Article 365)

• A state disregards Union directives, leading to the assumption of governance failure.

Specific Situations Leading to President’s Rule

• Hung Assembly: No party secures a majority, preventing government formation.
• Collapse of a Coalition Government: The ruling party loses its majority, and the Chief Minister fails to prove majority support.
• No-Confidence Motion: The state government loses a trust vote in the Assembly.
• Election Delays: Unavoidable reasons like natural disasters, epidemics, or war prevent elections.

Watch: Daily Current Affairs

3. Parliamentary Approval and Duration

Initial Approval

• Once the President issues a proclamation, Parliament must approve it within two months.
• If the Lok Sabha is dissolved, the proclamation remains valid for 30 days after its reconstitution, provided the Rajya Sabha approves it.

Duration

• Initially, President’s Rule lasts six months.
• It can be extended for a maximum of three years, with Parliamentary approval every six months.
• Conditions for Extension Beyond One Year (44th Amendment Act, 1978)
• A National Emergency must be in effect in the state or the entire country.
• The Election Commission of India (ECI) must certify that state elections cannot be conducted due to difficulties.

Revocation

• The President can revoke President’s Rule at any time, without needing parliamentary approval.

4. Impact of President’s Rule

• The Governor assumes executive authority on behalf of the President.
• The State Legislature’s powers transfer to Parliament.
• The Council of Ministers is dissolved.
• The State Legislative Assembly may be suspended or dissolved.
• Parliament passes laws and budgets for the state.
• The President can issue ordinances when Parliament is not in session.
• The High Court’s powers remain unaffected.

5. Supreme Court Judgements on President’s Rule

The Supreme Court has played a crucial role in preventing the misuse of Article 356.

S.R. Bommai vs Union of India (1994)

• Established that President’s Rule is subject to judicial review.
• The central government must justify its decision in court.
• State Assemblies should not be dissolved immediately; floor tests must be conducted first.

Rameshwar Prasad Case (2006)

• The Supreme Court ruled that President’s Rule must be based on objective criteria.
• The Governor’s recommendation alone is insufficient to justify its imposition.

6. Key Recommendations of Commissions

To prevent political misuse, various commissions have proposed reforms.

Sarkaria Commission (1983)

• President’s Rule should be imposed only as a last resort.
• The Governor must warn the state government before recommending Article 356.
• Alternatives, such as floor tests and mediation, should be explored first.

Punchhi Commission (2007)

• Localized imposition of Article 356: Instead of dismissing the entire state government, it should be applied to specific districts or regions.
• The Governor’s role must be neutral, preventing political bias.

7. Criticism of President’s Rule

Despite its intended purpose, President’s Rule has faced controversy due to frequent misuse.

Major Concerns

• Recurrent Use: Imposed over 100 times since 1950.
• Indira Gandhi’s tenure (1966-1977) saw 39 instances, often to dismiss opposition governments.
• Erosion of Federalism: It centralizes power, weakening state autonomy.
• Suspension of Democracy: Elected state governments are dismissed, disrupting democratic governance.
• Unauthorized Grounds: Political instability and lack of a clear mandate have been misused as justifications for imposing President’s Rule.

Examples of Misuse

• Indira Gandhi’s Era (1966-1977): President’s Rule was invoked 27 times against opposition-led states.
• Bihar (2005): President’s Rule was imposed even before a floor test, later ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court.