Q. With reference to Centre-state relations during emergency, consider the following statements:
1. During National Emergency, President of India can cancel the transfer of finances from the Centre to the states.
2. During State Emergency, all the Money bills passed by the state legislature automatically gets reserved for the consideration of the President.
3. During Financial Emergency, Centre can give directions to the states to reduce the salaries of any class of persons serving in the state.
How many of the above given statements are correct?
Exp) Option b is the correct answer answer.
Statement 1 is correct: While the proclamation of national emergency (under Article 352) is in operation, the president can modify the constitutional distribution of revenues between the Centre and the states. This means that the President can either reduce or cancel the transfer of finances (both tax sharing and grants-in-aifrom the Centre to the states.
Statement 2 is incorrect: There is no such provision for automatic reservation of Money Bill passed by state government to President of India during the state emergency.
Statement 3 is correct: While the proclamation of financial emergency (under Article 360) is in operation, the Centre can give directions to the states: (i) to observe the specified canons of financial propriety; (ii) to reduce the salaries and allowances of all class of persons serving in the state; and (iii) to reserve all money bills and other financial bills for the consideration of the President.
| Important Tips Supreme Court’s guidelines given in S.R. Bommai case about the President’s Rule: • The proclamation (of President’s Rule) is subject to judicial review on grounds of mala fide intention. • The court has the power to revive the suspended or dissolved state government if the grounds for the imposition is found to be invalid and unconstitutional. • The state assembly cannot be dissolved before parliamentary approval for the imposition of Article 356 and the President can only suspend the assembly. • Serious allegations of corruption against the state ministry and financial instability are not grounds for the imposition of Article 356. |
