President’s Rule (Article 356)- Explained Pointwise

President’s Rule (Article 356): A Controversial Power

Article 356 of the Indian Constitution, known as the President’s Rule, allows the central government to govern a state under specific circumstances directly. For those seeking a detailed President’s Rule (Article 356) explanation, this is a significant power in India’s federal system, but also a contentious one.

Key Points:

• Trigger: President’s Rule is imposed when the state’s constitutional machinery fails or governance breaks down. Common reasons include political instability, a hung assembly (where no party has a clear majority), or severe law and order issues.
• Central Takeover: When invoked, the central government takes control of the state’s administration.
• Original Intent vs. Practice: Originally designed as a last-resort emergency measure, it has been used frequently, sometimes raising concerns about political motivations.
• Judicial Scrutiny: The use of Article 356 has faced criticism and has been subject to judicial review to ensure its proper application.
• Recent Relevance: Discussions around the President’s Rule have resurfaced due to the political crisis in Manipur, following the resignation of the Chief Minister. This highlights the ongoing debate and importance of this constitutional provision.

In essence, the paraphrase emphasizes the power granted by Article 356, the conditions for its use, the criticism surrounding its frequent application, and its recent relevance in the context of Manipur’s political situation.

Table of Contents

1. What is Article 356 of the Indian Constitution? (Definition, purpose, and scope)
2. What is the procedure and duration for imposing the President’s Rule in India under Article 356? (Process, parliamentary approvals, time limits)
3. What are the consequences of the President’s Rule? (Impact on state government, administration, legislative assembly)
4. What is the history of the President’s Rule in India? (Chronological overview of instances, trends, and reasons for invocation)
5. What is the Supreme Court landmark judgment on the President’s Rule? (Key cases, judicial interpretations, safeguards against misuse)
6. What are the criticisms of President’s Rule and the key recommendations for reform? (Concerns about misuse, political motivations, suggestions for stricter guidelines)
7. What is the way Forward? (Discussion on balancing central authority with state autonomy, potential improvements in the application of Article 356)

Read more: India State of Forest Report (ISFR) 2023

What is Article 356 of the Indian Constitution?

Article 356 grants the President the authority to impose central rule in a state based on the recommendation of the Union Council of Ministers if he determines that the state government is unable to function according to constitutional provisions. When enforced, the Centre takes over the state government’s responsibilities, and the powers of the state legislature are exercised by Parliament for the duration of the rule.

Exception: The jurisdiction of High Courts remains unaffected.

Constitutional Basis for President’s Rule:

Articles 355 to 357 in Part XVIII, along with Article 365 in Part XIX of the Indian Constitution, deal with the provisions related to the President’s Rule.

Article 355	It mandates the Union to protect states from external aggression and internal disturbances, ensuring that governance aligns with constitutional principles
Article 356	Allows the President to take over the governance of a state upon satisfaction that its constitutional machinery has broken down.
Article 357	Article 357 of the Constitution of India allows Parliament to exercise the legislative powers of a state when a Proclamation is issued under Article 356
Article 365	States that if a state government fails to comply with directions from the Union, the President may assume direct control over the state.

Procedure and Duration for the Imposition of President’s Rule in India under Article 356

1. Governor’s Report: The process begins when the President receives a report from the Governor stating that the state government cannot function according to constitutional provisions.
2. Presidential Satisfaction: If the President is convinced of the crisis, a proclamation imposing the President’s Rule is issued.
3. Parliamentary Approval: Within two months, both Houses of Parliament must approve the proclamation by a simple majority.
4. Duration: Initially, the President’s Rule is imposed for six months and can be extended up to three years with parliamentary approval every six months.
5. Extension Beyond One Year: As per the 44th Amendment Act of 1978, extending the President’s Rule beyond one year requires:
   • A certification from the Election Commission states that elections cannot be conducted in the state.
   • An ongoing national emergency in the entire country or any part of the state.

Also read: The Key Differences Between UPSC and APSC

Circumstances Leading to President’s Rule:

• Failure of the state legislature to elect a Chief Minister within the prescribed time.
• Breakdown of a coalition government, resulting in the Chief Minister losing majority support and failing to prove a majority.
• A no-confidence vote leads to the loss of a majority in the legislative assembly.
• Postponement of elections due to emergencies such as natural disasters, epidemics, or war.

Consequences of President’s Rule

1. Governor’s Role: The Governor assumes executive control and administers the state on behalf of the President.
2. Legislative Assembly: The state assembly is either dissolved or kept in suspended animation.
3. Parliament’s Role: The Union Parliament assumes the legislative functions of the state.
4. Impact on Governance: No new state laws can be enacted, and administration is handled by bureaucrats.
5. Fresh Elections: The Election Commission must conduct elections within six months unless an extension is granted.
6. Policy Stagnation: Public welfare and state development policies often face delays.

History of President’s Rule in India

• Since 1950, President’s Rule has been imposed 134 times across 29 states and union territories.
• Manipur and Uttar Pradesh have seen the highest number of impositions, with 10 times each.
• However, these states have not spent the longest time under central rule.

Longest Duration Under President’s Rule:

1. Jammu & Kashmir – Over 12 years (4,668 days), primarily due to militant and separatist unrest.
2. Punjab – Over 10 years (3,878 days), affected by prolonged insurgency.
3. Puducherry – Over 7 years (2,739 days), caused by frequent government collapses.

Landmark Supreme Court Judgment: S.R. Bommai v. Union of India (1994)

The Supreme Court established strict judicial oversight over the imposition of the President’s Rule:

1. Judicial Review: The court ruled that the President’s Rule is subject to judicial scrutiny.
2. Material Justification: The judiciary can assess whether sufficient grounds existed for its imposition.
3. Federalism Protection: The ruling emphasized that states are not mere extensions of the Centre.
4. Restoration of Government: If Parliament does not approve the President’s Rule within two months, the dismissed government must be reinstated.

Read more: Mastering Geography for UPSC Prelims: A Strategic Study Guide

Criticisms and Need for Reform

Misuse of Article 356:

• Over 100 instances of imposition, with 39 cases under Indira Gandhi alone.
• Often used as a political tool to dismiss opposition-led state governments.
• This leads to centralization of power, undermining federalism.
• Democratic Disruption: Prevents elected representatives from functioning.
• Dubious Grounds: Some dismissals were based on internal party conflicts rather than genuine governance failure.

Key Reform Recommendations

1. Sarkaria Commission: Suggested using Article 356 as a last resort, with prior warnings before imposition.
2. Punchhi Commission: Recommended a localized approach, applying central rule only to specific regions rather than an entire state.

The Way Forward

1. Strict Adherence to S.R. Bommai Guidelines: The Centre must follow Supreme Court directives to prevent misuse.
2. Strengthening Federalism: Institutional mechanisms should resolve state crises without resorting to Article 356.
3. Judicial Oversight: Fast-track courts should review the President’s Rule proclamations to prevent politically motivated actions.
4. Alternative Measures: Explore solutions like dialogue, financial aid, or the Governor’s intervention before invoking Article 356.
5. Decentralized Emergency Provisions: Instead of enforcing the central rule on an entire state, consider limited interventions.

Conclusion

Article 356 remains an essential constitutional tool to ensure governance stability in cases of breakdown. However, its history shows frequent political misuse. While judicial interventions, particularly the S.R. Bommai case, have restricted its arbitrary application, further safeguards are needed to uphold India’s federal structure. Moving forward, striking a balance between constitutional stability and federal autonomy is crucial for maintaining India’s democratic integrity.