Article 356 of the Indian Constitution

Article 356 of the Indian Constitution empowers the President of India to impose President’s Rule in a state when there is a failure of constitutional

Article 356 of the Indian Constitution: President’s Rule

Article 356 of the Indian Constitution empowers the President of India to impose President’s Rule in a state when there is a failure of constitutional machinery in that state. This provision is often referred to as the State Emergency or Constitutional Emergency in a state. It forms a crucial part of the emergency provisions in the Constitution, allowing the Union Government to take direct control of a state’s administration.

---

Text of Article 356

"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 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 or any other authority in 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."

---

Provisions of Article 356

1. Grounds for Proclamation:

   • If the Governor of a State reports to the President that the government in the state is unable to function according to constitutional provisions.
   • If there is a breakdown of law and order, failure of governance, or inability of the state legislature to function.

2. Presidential Proclamation:

   • The President can issue a proclamation of President’s Rule in the state.
   • The proclamation is subject to Parliamentary approval within two months.

3. Duration of President’s Rule:

   • Once approved, President’s Rule remains in force for six months.
   • It can be extended for a maximum of three years, with parliamentary approval every six months and subject to conditions laid down in the 44th Amendment.

4. Effect on State Government:

   • The Council of Ministers in the state, including the Chief Minister, is dismissed.
   • The state legislature is either dissolved or suspended, and the Union Parliament assumes its legislative functions.
   • The Governor administers the state under the Union Government’s direction.

5. Revocation of President’s Rule:

   • The President can revoke the proclamation at any time without parliamentary approval.

---

Key Features of Article 356

1. Central Authority Over States:

   • Article 356 allows the Union Government to intervene in state matters to maintain constitutional governance.

2. Checks and Balances:

   • The Supreme Court and High Courts can review the validity of a proclamation to prevent misuse.
   • Parliamentary approval ensures democratic accountability.

3. Temporary Measure:

   • The imposition of President’s Rule is a temporary solution aimed at restoring governance in a state, not a permanent takeover.

---

Historical Background of Article 356

1. Drafting of the Constitution:

   • Article 356 was modeled after Section 93 of the Government of India Act, 1935, which allowed the British Governor-General to assume control over provincial governance in case of failure.

2. Intent of the Framers:

   • The provision was included as a last resort to deal with extraordinary situations in states.

---

Use of Article 356

Since independence, Article 356 has been invoked multiple times, often leading to debates about its misuse.

1. First Use (1951):

   • President’s Rule was imposed in Punjab following the dismissal of the Gopi Chand Bhargava government.

2. Frequent Usage:

   • Between 1950 and the 1990s, Article 356 was invoked over 100 times, often criticized for being used for political reasons.

3. Landmark Cases:

   • S.R. Bommai v. Union of India (1994): The Supreme Court ruled that the imposition of President’s Rule is subject to judicial review. It also emphasized that such power should be exercised only in exceptional circumstances.

---

Judicial Interpretation of Article 356

1. S.R. Bommai Case (1994):

   • The Supreme Court laid down guidelines to curb arbitrary imposition of President’s Rule.
   • The proclamation must not be based on political considerations and should be justified with valid reasons.

2. Judicial Review:

   • The courts can examine whether the proclamation was made in accordance with the Constitution and overturn it if found unconstitutional.

---

Criticism of Article 356

1. Misuse for Political Gains:

   • It has been widely criticized for being used by the Union Government to dismiss opposition-led state governments.

2. Threat to Federalism:

   • Frequent invocation of Article 356 undermines the federal structure of India, as it centralizes power in the Union Government.

3. Ambiguity in Application:

   • The lack of clear criteria for invoking Article 356 has often led to subjective interpretations.

---

44th Amendment and Safeguards

1. Limits on Duration:

   • The 44th Amendment (1978) limited the extension of President’s Rule beyond one year to situations where:
     • A national emergency is in operation in the entire country or part of the state.
     • The Election Commission certifies that elections cannot be held in the state.

2. Parliamentary Oversight:

   • The amendment emphasized stricter parliamentary scrutiny to prevent arbitrary imposition of President’s Rule.

---

Significance of Article 356

1. Ensures Constitutional Governance:

   • It acts as a safeguard against breakdowns in state machinery, ensuring governance according to constitutional principles.

2. Maintains National Unity:

   • Allows the Union Government to address serious threats to law and order or governance in states.

3. Promotes Accountability:

   • The requirement for parliamentary approval and judicial review ensures checks and balances.

---

Conclusion

Article 356 is a vital constitutional provision designed to address crises in state governance. While it serves as a necessary tool to maintain constitutional order, its history of misuse highlights the need for restraint, judicial oversight, and strict adherence to democratic principles. The safeguards introduced by the 44th Amendment and the guidelines laid down in the S.R. Bommai case have helped restore the balance between federalism and the Union’s power to intervene.