3.

ARTICLE 356

When the Article 356 was incorporated in the Indian Constitution it had considered the past as well as the
present. In past we have seen that whenever there was lack of central control over the provinces there was chaos,
indiscipline, and ultimately disintegration. Therefore the Article 356 was introduced. It gives guardian like power to
the centre to supervise the constitutional functioning of the states. This was the objective of the Article 356. The
problems with the objectives are that they cannot be automatically implemented. They require strong means to get it
implemented. This is the tragedy of the objectives. After all object is just a tool at the hands of the subject.
Therefore, nothing is wrong with Article 356. The main concern is the means through which it is implemented.
The 'means' that is We, the people of India have the tendency to forget the things Le. the past. We forget
good things; we also forget bad things. That is why at one point of time we vote against a leader because of his bad
performance but again we forget his bad things and choose him again as the leader next time. Therefore, we are
trapped into a vicious cycle where there is no choice. Unfortunately our leaders are always aware of this fact. That is
why the Centre misused the Article 356.
Role of Governor:
There is no room for any kind of discretionary power in a democracy. Any such provision is bound to be
controversial. When the President appoints a Governor on the recommendation of the Prime Minister, there is no
question of the impartially of the post.
We have a tendency to become irrational. We expect that a governor will do different. The entire problem
starts with this assumption.
About the Use of Article 356:
I. Article 356 should be used sparingly, in extreme cases, as a measure of last resort, when all available alternatives
fail to prevent or rectify a breakdown of the constitutional machinery in the States;
II. (A) In a situation of political breakdown, the Governor should explore all possibilities of having a Government
enjoying majority support in the Assembly. If it is not possible for such a Government to be installed and if fresh
elections can be held without avoidable delay, he should ask the outgoing Ministry. If there is one, to continue as a
caretaker Government and then dissolve the Legislative Assembly.

(B) If the above conditions are absent, the governor should recommend the proclamation of President's rule without
dissolving the Assembly.
III. Every Proclamation should be placed before each House of Parliament at the earliest, in any case before the
expiry of the two-months period contemplated in Article 356.

IV. The State Legislative Assembly should not be dissolved either by the Governor or the President before the
Proclamation has been laid before the Parliament and its has had an opportunity to consider it. Article 356 should