Failure of Constitutional Machinery of State

Abstract
ARTICLE 356 is one among the nine Articles, beginning from Art. 352 and ending with Art. 360, known as
Emergency Provisions, enumerated in Chapter XVIII of the Constitution. Art. 356 was introduced as Draft Article
278, on August 3, 1949 by the Union Law Minister, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar.
Under Article 356, the President can dismiss a State Government or dissolve a State Assembly or keep it under
suspended animation in the event of a failure of the constitutional machinery in that State. The Article owes its
genesis to Section 93 of the Government of India Act 1935, a section which essentially dealt with the "taking power
of the Provincial Government by the Governor."
Keywords: Emergency, Role of President, Reason for Imposition of State Emergency, Consequences, Misuse of Art
356

to such severe crisis situations cannot deal with them

Introduction
Emergency under the constitution means a situation
which is not a normal situation and need urgent
remedial action. If we go by the dictionary meaning
of the word “Emergency” then it says that it is a
situation which possess an immediate risk and
requires urgent attention to deliver reasonable
conditions of life. It is mandatory for the government
to be prepared with all required measures to
safeguard its people from any kinds of crisis. Hence,
the Government has been conferred powers to be
prepared for any such situations before it arrives.
Even in the ancient times the principle of necessity
was well recognized and had played a significant
role. India being a democratic nation1, when reaches
in its normal process since it needs immediate action
and therefore the president is given the authority to
proclaim emergency after he is satisfied and with the
aid and advice of council of ministers that it is the
need of the hour. But that is the time when the
president is the only controlling authority and being a
democratic state. It creates the assumption of giving
extra ordinary powers in the hands of the president
for protecting the civil and political rights ensured to
the citizens by the democratic nation. During
emergency, all the fundamental rights of a citizen or
an individual are suspended, except Article 20 and 21
where Article 20 talks about certain rights which
include protection in respect of conviction for certain
offences and these protections include expost facto
law , double jeopardy and right against self-
incrimination . Article 21 talks about Right to Life
and Personal Liberty wherein every individual from

1 its very birth has a right to live a meaningful and

Asmit Chitransh, available at http://jurip.org/wp-
content/uploads/2017/08/Asmit-Chitransh.pd f , last dignified life. The object of the fundamental right
visited on 02/02/18.

1|Page
 [Type the document title][0-0]
under Article 21 is to prevent encroachment upon in a tight mould of federalism. No matter what the
personal liberty and deprivation of life except circumstances, it cannot change its form and shape. It
according to procedure established by law. Right to can never be Unitary. On the other hand, the
life means the right to lead meaningful, complete and Constitution of India can be unitary as well as
dignified life. The fundamental rights are one of the federal according to the requirements of time and
pillars of the Indian Constitution Article 21 being circumstances. In normal times, it is framed to work
core and since then these rights constitute the basic as a federal system. But in times of Emergency, it is
structure so they cannot be distorted or deprived off. so designed as to make it work as though it was a
In a situation like emergency since it is already a unitary system’.
situation difficult to handle these rights seize
temporarily which revive once the proclamation The constitution stimulates three types of
period ends. emergencies:
 An emergency due to war, external
Background aggression or armed rebellion (Article 352).
The emergency provisions are contained in part This is popularly known as ‘National
XVIII of the constitution, from Articles 352 to 360. Emergency’. However, the Constitution
The Article owes its genesis article 93 of The employs the expression ‘Proclamation of
Government of India Act 1935, a section which Emergency’ 2to denote an emergency of this
essentially dealt with the taking over of the type.
Provincial Government by the Governor. These  An Emergency due to failure of the
provisions enable the Central Government to meet constitutional machinery in the states
any abnormal situation effectively. The rationality (Article 356). This is popularly known as
behind the incorporation of these provisions in the ‘President’s Rule’. It is also known by two
constitution is to safeguard the sovereignty, unity, other names ‘State Emergency’ or
integrity, and security of the country, the democratic ‘Constitutional Emergency’. However, the
political system and the Constitution. Constitution does not use the word
During an emergency, the Central Government ‘emergency’ for this situation.
becomes all powerful and the states go into the total  Financial Emergency due to threat to the
control of the Centre. It converts the federal structure financial stability or credit of India. (article
in to Unitary one without the formal amendment of 360)
the Constitution. This kind of transformation of the
political system from federal structure during normal
Meaning Of Failure of Failure of Constitutional
times to unitary during Emergency is a unique feature
Machinery Of State.
of the Indian Constitution. In this context, Dr B.R.
India adopted the Canadian model of federation
Ambedkar observed in the Constituent Assembly
which tilts the balance in favour of the Union. The
that:
‘All federal systems including American are placed
2 M Laxmikanth, Indian Polity, 16.1, (4th ed.2013)
INTERNATINAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH IN COMPUTER SCIENCE AND MANAGEMENT
VOL. NO. 00(0), ISSN NO.-2321-8088 Page 2
 [Type the document title][0-0]
constitutional provisions empower the Union to give
directions to the States in normal times as well,
because Article 355 enjoins on the Union the duty to
protect States against any external aggression and the
3
internal disturbance .
4
Aricle 356 and Article 357 incorporated in the
constitution of India gives the President , the
enormous power to impose president’s rule in any of
the state where he on the receipt of the report from
the governor, or is satisfied that the situation has been
arisen where state Government fails to carry on in
accordance with the provisions of the constitution.
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 body or authority in the State other than the
5
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.[Art 356 (1)].
This is an emergency provision where the Union
3 Negi Mohita, The Meaning of Breakdown of
Constitutional Machinery in India, available at
http://www.yourarticlelibrary.com/indian-
constitution/the-meaning-of-breakdown-of-
constitutional-machinery-in-india/5517 , last visited on
02/02/18
4 Dr. Seema Sharma, Article 356 of the Constitution:
A Critical Analysis,
available at http://lex-warrier.in/2014/04/article-356-
constitution-critical-analysis/, (04/02/18)
5 Art. 356, the Constitution of India.
INTERNATINAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH IN COMPUTER SCIENCE AND MANAGEMENT
VOL. NO. 00(0), ISSN NO.-2321-8088
Government may extend its power over the state.
Both the Houses of Parliament must ratify the
proclamation of emergency and if any of the House
fails to ratify the proclamation with in two months
the emergency may cease to operate. If the
Proclamation is ratified, t he emergency will last
long for six months.
Grounds of Imposition
The President’s Rule can be proclaimed under Article
356 on two grounds: one mentioned in the Article
356 itself and another in Article 365:
1) Article 356 empowers the President to issue
a proclamation, if he is satisfied that a
situation has been arisen in which the
Government of a State cannot be carried on
in accordance with the provisions of the
Constitution6. Notably, State Emergency or
President’s Rule can be invoked after a
receipt of report submitted by the Governor
of a state to the President. Though Article
163(1) obliges the Governor to act according
to the advice tendered by his Council of
Ministers excepting those matter with
respect to which the Constitution requires
him to exercise his discretion, and because
the furnishing of a report under Article
356(1) is not so mentioned by the
constitution as a function to be exercised by
him in his discretion, it is obvious that in the
matter of the Governor reporting to the
President that there has been a breakdown of
the Constitutional machinery must
necessarily be a matter in which the
Governor cannot possibly act according to
6 Supra 2, at 16.5.
Page 3
 [Type the document title][0-0]
the advice of the Council of Ministers. The
reason is that as a result of such report, if
adverse, the State Government itself would
be suspended, so that the Governor’s
Council of Ministers cannot be expected to
sign their death warrant. In the result, in
making a report under Article 356(1), the
Governor acts in his discretion, and as an
‘agent’ of the President . 7
2) Article 365 says that whenever a state fails
to comply with or to give effect to any
direction from the Centre, it will 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 the Constitution.
3) No party in the Assembly has a majority in
the State Legislative Assembly to be able to
form the government
4) A government may have majority support in
the House, but it may function in a manner
which is contravention to the provision of
Constitution.
5) Security of the State may be threatened by
the widespread breakdown of law and order
in the States.
6) And this point is further debatable whether
Art.356 can be revoked when there are
serious allegations of corruption against the
8
C.M. and the Ministers in a State.
Parliamentary Approval And Duration
A proclamation imposing President’s Rule must be
approved by both the Houses of Parliament, with in
two from months from the date of its issue. However,
7 the general elections to the legislative
Supra,1
8 M.P. Jain, Indian Constitutional Law,804, vol 1,
(ed.5th 2003 )
INTERNATINAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH IN COMPUTER SCIENCE AND MANAGEMENT
VOL. NO. 00(0), ISSN NO.-2321-8088
if the Proclamation of President’s Rule is issued at a
time when the Lok Sabha has been dissolved or the
dissolution of the Lok Sabha takes place during the
period of two months without approving the
proclamation, then the proclamation survives until 30
days from the first sitting of the Lok Sabha after its
reconstitution, provided the Rajya Sabha approves it
in mean times.
If approved by both the Houses of Parliament,
President’s Rule continues for six months. It can be
extended for a maximum period of three years with
the approval of the Parliament after every six months.
However, if the dissolution of Lok Sabhha takes
place during the period of six months without
approving the further continuation of the President’s
Rule, then the proclamation survives until 30 days
from the first sitting of the Lok Sabha after its
reconstitution but only when Rajya Sabha has in the
meantime approved its continuance 9.
Every resolution approving the proclamation of
President’s Rule or its continuation can be passed by
either House of Parliament only by simple majority
that means a majority of the members of that House
present and voting.
The 44th Amendment Act of 1978 introduced a new
provision to put restraint on the power of Parliament
to put restraint on the power of Parliament to extend
a proclamation of President’s Rule beyond one year.
Thus it is provided that the President’s Rule can be
extended by six months at a time only when the
following two conditions are fulfilled:
1) A proclamation of National Emergency
should be in operation in the whole of India,
or in the whole or any part of the State and
2) The Election Commission must certify that
9Supra 2, at Pg. 16.6,
Page 4
 [Type the document title][0-0]
Assembly of the concerned State cannot be bills and state budget at the time of emergency.
held on account of difficulties.

A proclamation of President’s Rule may be revoked

When the state legislature is thus suspended or
by the President at any time by a subsequent
dissolved:
proclamation. Such a proclamation does not require
1) Under Article 357 (1)(a) The Parliament
the parliament approval.
can delegate the power to make laws for the
state to the President or to any other
Consequences of Invoking President’s Rule
authority specified by him in this regard,
Under Article 356 (1)(a),The President can assume
2) The Parliament or in case of delegation, the
to himself the powers of the Governor. acquires the
President or any other specified authority
following extraordinary powers when the President’s
can make laws conferring powers and
Rule is imposed in a State:
imposing duties on the Centre or its officers
1) He can take up all the functions of the state
and authorities. [Article 357(1)(b)]
government and powers vested in the
3) The President can authorize when the Lok
governor or any other executive authority in
Sabha is not in session, expenditure from the
the state.
state consolidated fund pending its sanction
2) He can declare that the powers of the state
by the Parliament [Article 357 (1)(c)]
legislature are to be exercised by the
4) The President can promulgate, when the
Parliament.10
Parliament is not in session, ordinances for
3) He can take all other necessary steps
the governance of the state.
including the suspension of the
constitutional provisions relating to any Thus, the life of law made by the Parliament or
body or authority in the State. President during the the operation is not co-terminus
with the subsistence of the proclamation. This means
Therefore, when the President’s Rule is imposed in a
that the law does not come to an end automatically as
state, the President dismisses the State Council of
soon as proclamation is revoked. It continues to be
Ministers headed by Chief Minister. The state
operative even after the President’s Rule and is not
governor on behalf of President, carries on the State
revoked automatically the proclamation is revoked.
administration with the help of the chief secretary of
This provision means that though the power of Union
the state or the advisors appointed by the President,
to make laws for the State concerned on the subject
this is the reason why a proclamation under Article
with in the State list ceases as soon as the
356 is popularly known as the imposition of
proclamation under Article 356 (1) comes to an end ,
President’s Rule in a state. Further, president either
Under Article 357 (2) the laws made during the
suspends or dissolves the state legislative assembly.
existence of the proclamation continue to remain in
The parliament is one who passes the state legislative
force until they are altered repealed by the State

10
Legislature. State Legislature has a power to change
M.P. Jain, Indian Constitutional Law, 802, Vol
1, (ed.5th 2003 ) .
INTERNATINAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH IN COMPUTER SCIENCE AND MANAGEMENT
VOL. NO. 00(0), ISSN NO.-2321-8088 Page 5
 [Type the document title][0-0]
these laws.11
The President under Article 356(2) is not however
authorized to assume himself the powers vested in
the concerned state High Court or suspend the
provisions of the Constitution pertaining to it. It
means the constitutional position, status, powers and
functions of the concerned state high court remain
same even during the President’s Rule. Such a
proclamation may be revoked or varied by a
subsequent proclamation.12
Misuse of Article 356
If we talk about Article 356 of the Indian
Constitution, then it says that the sole purpose of
giving wide powers to Union Government is
basically to maintain law and order in the country
along with the preservation of the unity and integrity
of the nation. In Indian politics the period until 1967
has been described as the period of one dominant
party system. During this period the imposition of
President’s Rule was not frequent the reason behind
this was that the ruling party at the Centre and in
States was same and the disputes arising between
them could be resolved through the mechanism of the
party set up. However,13 the fourth general elections
saw the emergence of a multiparty and this ends the
monopoly of Congress. Thus Coalition ministries
were formed in a number of States for first time.
From here began the saga of frequent misuse of
Article 356 for political ands thereby disturbing the
federal structure of our Constitution and endangering
democracy in our country.
11 Durga Das Basu, Constitutional Law of India, 689,
(ed.8th ,2008)
12Supra 8 , at 799,
. affairs/article-356-its-use-and-misuse-1459773624-1,
13 Supra 4
INTERNATINAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH IN COMPUTER SCIENCE AND MANAGEMENT
VOL. NO. 00(0), ISSN NO.-2321-8088
The provision which was thought as a safety valve
proved to be a political weapon of the Centre against
the States. The provision which was intended to be
the dead letter has proved to be the death letter for
number of State Government because different
grounds which were never thought by the framers of
the Constitution have been used for the imposition of
Presidents Rule in the States to suit the political
interests of the party in power at the Centre.
Aricle 356 In Practice
Sarkaria Commission notes14 that since 1950, the
President’s Rule has been imposed on more than 100
times occasions, that is on an average twice a year.
Further, on member of occasions the President’s Rule
has been imposed in an arbitrary manner for political
or personal reasons. Hence, Article 356 has become
one of the controversial and most criticised provision
of the Constitution.
For the first time, the President’s Rule was imposed
in 1951. By now, all most all the states have been
brought under the President’s Rule, once or twice or
more. 1970s and 1980s will be remembered for the
most spiteful use of Article 356. From the year 1971
-1984 it was used 59 times with maximum being used
in the period 1977-79 . When general elections were
held to the Lok Sabha in 1977 after the internal
emergency, the ruling Congress lost and the Janta
Party came to power. The new Government headed
by Morarji Desai imposed President’s Rule in nine
States where the Congress Party was in power on the
14
Surendra Pandey, Article 356: its Use And Misuse,
available at https://www.jagranjosh.com/current-
last visited on 07/02/18
Page 6
 [Type the document title][0-0]
ground that assemblies no longer represented the
wishes of electorate. When the Congress Party
returned to power it did the same in nine states on the
same ground and imposed President’s Rule 17 times
15
during 1980-84 .
Though Article 356 had been misused even by
Jawaharlal Nehru16 to dismiss the majority
Communist government of Kerala, Indira Gandhi
used this provision as a weapon against the State
Government. In fact, Indira Gandhi under 38th
Amendment Act closed the concept of judicial review
at the time of State Emergency.
In 1992, President’s Rule was imposed in three BJP-
ruled states (M.P., Himachal Pradesh, and
Rajasthan) by the Congress Party on the ground that
they were not implementing sincerely the ban
imposed by the Centre on religious organisations.
Supreme Court Intervention
17
In 1994, the Supreme Court delivered the landmark
SR BOMMAI judgment where the court discussed
the length provisions of Article 356 and related issues
which reduced the scope for misuse of Article 356 by
establishing certain strict and mandating guidelines
for imposing State Emergency and as a result of
which, since early 2000, the incidents of imposing
President’s Rule have dropped substantially. This
case had huge impact on Centre-State Relations.
According to Sarkaria Commission, ‘Article 356
must be used “very sparingly” and “in extreme cases”
wherein there are no other viable alternatives to
prevent complete failure of constitutional machinery
in the state. In Punjab and Jammu & Kashmir, State
15 Supra 2, at 16.8
16
Supra 14
17 Ibid
INTERNATINAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH IN COMPUTER SCIENCE AND MANAGEMENT
VOL. NO. 00(0), ISSN NO.-2321-8088
Emergency lasted for 3 years which is the maximum
till date.
Justiciability of The Proclamation Under Article
356
From time to time, attempts have been made to bring
the matter of invocation of Art. 356(1) before the
Courts for scrutiny but such attempts have not
succeeded. In 1968, the ex- Chief Minister of
Haryana challenged the action of the Centre through
a writ petition, but the High Court dismissed the
same on the following grounds :-
1) The Court cannot go into the validity of the
proclamation because the president has
issued the same in the persuancce of his
constitutional powers under Article 356(1)
which is not the executive action of the
Union, and the Presitent himself is not
answerable to the jurisdiction of court in
view of Art. 356(1).
2) The consideration of the proclamation has
been specifically vested by the Constitution
in Parliament and excludes the jurisdiction
of Court.
3) Regarding the argument of malafides against
the Home Minister, the Court held that it
could no enquire in to the advice given by
him to the President in view of Art. 74(2)
4) The report submitted by the Governor to
President cannot be challenged or
questioned in the Court, as the court has no
jurisdiction over it.18
In Jyotirmoy Bose v. Union of India19, the Calcutta
high Court rejected a writ petition challenging the
President’s proclamation issued on March 19, 1970
18 Supra 8, at 811.
19 AIR 1971 Cal 122
Page 7
 [Type the document title][0-0]
under Art. 356. It was argued that in making
proclamation the President should have acted in his
discretion and not on ministerial advice. The Court
by rejecting this pea has emphasised that in matter of
proclamation under Art 356 the President act as a
constitutional head and must act in the advised given
by Council of Ministers.
Another important decision on this subject is that of
20
Bijayanand v. President of India , where the scope
of judicial scrutiny of this Article was discussed in
further detail. It was observed by the Orissa High
Court that the Governor, while sending his report to
the President, is required to act directly and not with
the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers and
whether such report is mala fide or not cannot be
questioned in a court of law because of the immunity
provided to him as well as President under Article
361 clause 1. Hence, it was again decided in favour
of the Central action.
STATE OF RAJASTHAN V. UNION OF INDIA21
In 1977 when the general election of Lok Sabha was
held in the country after the lifting of the emergency
of 1975, the congress party was badly routed in many
of the states by the Janata Party which won a large
number of seat in the Lok Sabha and therefore it
formed a government at the Centre but it was not in
power in any of the States. This means in these states
Congress ministers were functioning at the time and
they still had the time to run for completion of the
full term .
The Central Home Minister, Charan Singh, wrote a
letter to each of the Chief Minister of the State
mentioning that he should seek dissolution of the
State Legislature from the governor and obtain fresh
20 AIR 1974 Ori 52
21
AIR 1977 SC 1361.
INTERNATINAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH IN COMPUTER SCIENCE AND MANAGEMENT
VOL. NO. 00(0), ISSN NO.-2321-8088
mandate for the electorate. The state of Rajasthan
along with other states filed an original suit in the
Supreme Court against the Union of India as per
Article 131 asking the Court to declare this directive
of the Home Minister to be declared unconstitutional
and illegal . It was argued that the letter in question
was to the invocation of Article 356 in these States
and that the dissolution of the State Legislature on the
mentioned ground in the letter was prima facie
outside the perview of Article 356.
So, the Supreme Court dismissed the suit stating the
Article 74(2) disables the Court from inquiring into
“the very existence or nature or contents” of
ministerial advice to the President and thus Article
356(5) makes it impossible for the court to question
the President‟s satisfaction on any ground unless and
until resort to Article 356 in the given situation is
shown to be grossly “preserve and unreasonable”.22
SR BOMMAI v. UNION OF INDIA23
Facts
In Karnataka the Janta Party being the majority party
in the State Legislature had formed Government
under the leadership of S.R. Bommai but it was by
September 1988, Janta Dal which was formed and
mingled with the Janata Party and Lok Dal . The
Ministry was added thirteen members and in two
days a legislator of Janata Dal defected from the
party. The Governor of Karnataka had reported to the
President that there were defections in the existing
ruling party as nineteen letters were sent to him by
the council of ministers from withdrawing their
support. He also stated that on the withdrawal of the
22 DURGA DAS BASU, COMMENTARY ON THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, 11005 (Wadhwa And
Company Law Publishers 13th Edition).
23 AIR 1994 SC 1918
Page 8
 [Type the document title][0-0]
support in the ruling party, the Chief Minister S. R. 4) If the Court holds the presidential
Bommai also failed to call in for majority of proclamation to be unconstitutional it has
assembly, which is inappropriate under the power to restore the dismissed state
Constitution. And so, the State is to be administered government and revive the state legislative
by the Centre. It was seen that seven out of the assembly if it was suspended or dissolved.
nineteen legislators have complained about 5) The state legislative assembly should be
misrepresentation in their respective letters and dissolved only after the Parliament has
therefore, the Chief Minister and the Law Minister approved the Presidential proclamation.
met the Governor the same day to summon the Until such approval is given, the president
Assembly to prove the confidence of assembly in his can only suspend the assembly. In case the
government. The same was forwarded to the Parliament fails to approve the
President through letter . But on the very same day, proclamatoion, the assembly would get
Governor has sent another report stating that the reactivated.
Chief Minister has lost confidence of the majority of 6) Secularism is one of the basic feature of
the House and requested for President’s Proclamation Indian Constitution. Hence, a state
under Art 356 and eventually the same was granted. government pursuing anti secular politics is
A writ petition was filed challenging the validity of liable to action under Article 356.
24
the Art 356 of the Constitution . 7) The question of state government losing the
confidence of the legislative assembly
Judgment should be decided on the floor of the House
Supreme Court has laid down the following and until that is done the ministry should not
prepositions on the imposition of President’s Rule.in be unseated.
a State under Article 35625: 8) Where a new party assumes power at the
1) The presidential proclamation imposing centre, it will not have the authority to
President’s Rule is subject to judicial dismiss ministries formed by other parties in
review. the states26.
2) The satisfaction of President must be based 9) The power under Article 356 is an
on the relevant material and it can be stuck exceptional power and should be used only
down if is based on irrelevant grounds or if occasionally to meet the requirements of
it was found to be malafide or perverse. special situations.
3) Burden lies on the Centre to prove that
relevant material should exist to justify the
Suggestions
imposition of President’s Rule.
As per my research, to prevent the misuse of Article
356 it should be amended instead of abrogating it . It
24 is suggested that the president’s satisfaction as
By Jeyapriya Rajendran, available at
https://lawlex.org/lex-bulletin/case-study-s-r-bommai-
v-union-of-india/7821 last visited on 10/01/18.
25 Supra 2, at 16.8. 26 Ibid
INTERNATINAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH IN COMPUTER SCIENCE AND MANAGEMENT
VOL. NO. 00(0), ISSN NO.-2321-8088 Page 9
 [Type the document title][0-0]
envisaged by art. 356 should be reached at after
consultation with a five-member committee
consisting of prime minister, attorney general of
India, chairman of Rajya sabha, leader of the
opposition party in lok sabha and the governor of the
concerned state. it is also suggested that the
corresponding provision should be made for the
union as well for the State, in such a case there is
more chance of the article being construed correctly
and not being misused as in the past.
Conclusion
It is the evident from the study that Article 356 was
incorporated in our Constitution for resolving the
ministerial crisis in the State. The arbitrary usage of
Article 356 would not only result in destroying the
federal nature of our constitution which is also one of
the basic features of the constitution but also hampers
the democracy of our country. But this provision of
Constitution has been frequently misused by the
parties at the Centre to achieve their political ends.
The hope and expression that this provision would
remain a dead letter are belied. Since the coming in to
force of Constitution President’s Rule has been
imposed on more than 100 occasions. The Union
Government has not adopted a uniform pattern to
invoke the President’s Rule
There should be some effective mechanism to ensure
limitation on the power with in the purview of
political pickups and should provide a way to
safeguard the interest of general public. Judicial
review is a good safeguard to keep down the
frequency of article 356 and act as a built in
mechanism to check the arbitrary powers available
under the emergency provisions to the Parliament and
Executive.
It needs to be remembered that only the spirit of
INTERNATINAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH IN COMPUTER SCIENCE AND MANAGEMENT
VOL. NO. 00(0), ISSN NO.-2321-8088
“cooperative federalism” can preserve the balance
between the Union and the States and promote the
good of the people and not an attitude of dominance
or superiority. Under our constitutional system, no
single entity can claim superiority. So with the above
analysis I would conclude that it is not good to
abrogate a provision which was inserted after a great
deliberations. The best way is to retain it and practice
it with great caution as our Founding Fathers
expected. This means while proclaiming State
emergency, the Union Government should keep in
mind the interest and the ultimate benefit to the
people.
Acknowledgement
It is not possible to prepare a project report
without the assistance and encouragement of
other people. This is certainly no exception. On the
very outset of this project I would like to extend
my sincere and heartfelt obligation towards all
the personages who helped me in this endeavor.
Without their active guidance , help , co-operation
and encouragement , I would not have made
headway in this project.
For conscientious guidance and encouragement to
accomplish this assignment.
I extend my gratitude to INTERNATIONAL
RESEARCH OF COMPUTER SCIENCE AND
MANAGEMENT for giving me this opportunity.
I also acknowledge with a deep sense of
reverence , my gratitude towards my friends and
members of my family who have always
supported me morally as well as economically.
Page 10
 [Type the document title][0-0]
References

1 Asmit Chitransh, available at

http://jurip.org/wp-
content/uploads/2017/08/Asmit-Chitransh.pd
f , last visited on 02/02/18.
2 Negi Mohita, The Meaning of Breakdown of
Constitutional Machinery in India, available
at http://www.yourarticlelibrary.com/indian-
constitution/the-meaning-of-breakdown-of-
constitutional-machinery-in-india/5517 , last
visited on 02/02/18
3 Dr. Seema Sharma, Article 356 of the
Constitution: A Critical Analysis,
available at http://lex-
warrier.in/2014/04/article-356-constitution-
critical-analysis/, (04/02/18)
4 Surendra Pandey, Article 356: its Use And
Misuse, available at
https://www.jagranjosh.com/current-
affairs/article-356-its-use-and-misuse-
1459773624-1, last visited on 07/02/18
5 By Jeyapriya Rajendran, available at
https://lawlex.org/lex-bulletin/case-study-s-r-
Manasvi Agrawal
bommai-v-union-of-india/7821 last visited on Student,Indore Institute of Law,Indore,India
10/01/18.
6 M Laxmikanth, Indian Polity, 16.1, (4th
ed.2013) .
7 M.P. Jain, Indian Constitutional Law,
802, Vol 1, (ed.5th 2003 ) . .
8 Durga Das Basu, Constitutional Law of India,
689, (ed.8th ,2008 )

Author :

INTERNATINAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH IN COMPUTER SCIENCE AND MANAGEMENT

VOL. NO. 00(0), ISSN NO.-2321-8088 Page 11