Q. Consider the following statements about the judicial review of Article 356:
1.The 38th Constitutional Amendment made the President’s satisfaction under Article 356 immune from judicial review.
2.The 44th Constitutional Amendment Act nullified the provision that barred judicial review of the President’s satisfaction.
3.As per current constitutional provisions, the President’s satisfaction under Article 356 cannot be challenged in court.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
Answer: A
Notes:
Explanation:
- The 38th Amendment Act, 1975, during the Emergency period, made the satisfaction of the President in invoking Article 356 “final and conclusive”, thereby barring courts from questioning it.
- This was intended to shield the proclamation of President’s Rule from judicial scrutiny.
- The 44th Amendment Act, 1978, revoked the changes made by the 38th Amendment.
- It restored the scope for judicial review, allowing courts to examine whether the President’s satisfaction was based on relevant and valid grounds.
- As clarified by the Supreme Court in the Bommai case (1994), the President’s proclamation under Article 356 is subject to judicial review.
- Courts can strike down the proclamation if found to be malafide, based on irrelevant or extraneous grounds, or perverse.
Source: Laxmikant (Polity)
