Q. Consider the following statements:
1.S.R. Bommai case restricted the arbitrary imposition of President’s Rule in a state.
2.During President’s Rule, the state is administered by the President of India through the Governor of the state.
3.Disagreement between state and central government on policy matters is one of the grounds for imposing President’s Rule in a state.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
Explanations –
Statements 1 and 2 are correct. The S.R. Bommai case was a landmark judgment by the Supreme Court of India that restricted the arbitrary use of Article 356, which allows for the imposition of President’s Rule in a state. The judgment emphasized that such power must be exercised with caution and only under certain conditions, preventing its misuse. During President’s Rule, the state government is suspended, and the central government takes direct control of the state’s administration. The President acts through the centrally appointed Governor, who administers the state on behalf of the President.
Statement 3 is incorrect. Disagreement on policy matters between a state and the central government is not a valid ground for imposing President’s Rule. Article 356 can be invoked only when there is a failure of constitutional machinery in a state, not merely due to policy disagreements.
Source: The Hindu
