Arunachal Pradesh President Rule

Parties:
Nabam Rebia, and Bamang Felix … Appellants

Versus

Deputy Speaker and others … Respondents

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Bench:
Jagdish Singh Khehar J.
Dipak Misra J.
Madan B. Lokur J.
Pinaki Chandra Ghose J.
N.V. Ramana J.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ratio Decidendi: The Supreme Court settled the question of governor's discretion
and the 'scope' of judicial review over governor's functions.

Court opined: The Constitution Bench judgment of the Supreme Court in Nabam

Rebia versus Deputy Speaker on July 13, 2016, held that a Governor is bound to
convene a meeting of the Assembly for a floor test on the recommendation of the
Cabinet.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Issues:
1. What is the scope of the Governor's discretionary power under Article 163(2)?
2. Does the Governor have “discretionary power” with respect to functioning of
the State Legislature in matters concerning summoning of the session,
 removal of the speaker and proceedings of disqualification under Xth
Schedule?
3. Is the Speaker’s act of deciding on disqualification petitions under Xth
Schedule when a petition for his removal is pending before the House
constitutionally permissible?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Case details:
Arunachal Pradesh experienced a constitutional crisis between November 2015 and
March 2016. In the Arunachal Pradesh Legislative Assembly, the ruling Congress
party had a majority of 47 members in the house, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)
was in the opposition with 11 members along with 2 independent members. On the
3rd of November 2015, the 11 BJP MLAs and 2 independents asked the Governor
for the following:
● The removal of the Speaker of the Assembly (Nabam Rebia)
● Preponing the next Session of the Assembly
● The Governor (without consulting the Chief Minister or the Speaker) preponed
the next session of the assembly to 16.12.2015. The removal of the Speaker
was listed as the first item of business to be discussed on the first day.
On December 16th, the scheduled session commenced in a community hall (and not
the Legislative Assembly) with 33 MLAs taking part. During the first day of the
session, the house removed the Speaker and his office was declared vacant. On the
next day of the session which was held in a hotel, Nabam Tuki was removed as
Chief Minister and Kalikho Pul was installed as the new Chief Minister. Nabam Rebia
then moved the Gauhati High Court to challenge the preponement of the Assembly
and all subsequent events.
The Gauhati High Court ruled that neither the Governor’s discretion nor the
proceedings of a Legislature can be challenged in a court of law under Articles 163
and 212 of the Constitution. As a consequence, the Court held that the actions of the
Assembly and the Governor had been entirely within the law and their remit as
functionaries of the people of the State.
Following this, Speaker Rebia appealed to the Supreme Court to hold the Governor’s
act of interfering in the functioning of the State legislature as falling outside the scope
of Article 161 and Article 163(2).

Conclusion:
This case is a suitable example for portraying how the judiciary can keep a
check on the federal system in India and prevent institutions and
constitutional bodies of the executive from overpowering each other. While
this case was litigated the Union government dismissed the State government
and imposed President’s rule on 26th January 2016. The Court, for the first
time in its history, effectively nullified the President's rule and restored the
previous State government with Nabam Tuki as Chief Minister. However, Chief
Minister Tuki was soon voted out of power in a floor test and the Court’s
decision was reversed through political means.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------