Skip to main content

Article 356- Dead letter of the Constitution

     Article 356- Dead letter of the Constitution 


One of the landmark judgments given by this law of land, that is Supreme Court of India, was in the case of S. R. Bommai VS. Union of India where it discussed the extent of the Article 356 inculcated in Constitution of India. It deals with the President’s authority to impose rule over any State in India. The sole purpose indentified in this judgment was to curb the blatant misuse which the Centre may have of Article 356 of the Constitution of India, which allowed the President’s rule to be imposed over state governments.

According to Article 356, which is also known as ‘Dead letter of the Indian Constitution’, deals with the President’s rule which can be imposed over any State of India. The elected state government is then dismissed and Council of Ministers is suspended at legislature, and administration is conducted directly by the Governor of the state. There governor becomes the appointee of the President and therefore a functionary of the Union Government because Governor is appointed by the President only.

The principles which were laid down by the Supreme Court of India in S. R. Bommai Vs. Union of India are as follows:

  1. The majority enjoyed by the Council of Ministers shall be tested on the floor of the house.

  2. Centre should give a warning to the State and a time period of one week to reply.

  3. The court cannot question the advice tendered by the Cmos to the President but it can question the material behind the satisfaction of the President. Hence, judicial review will involve three questions only that is:

  • Is there any material behind the proclamation?

  • Is the material relevant?

  • Was there any malafide use of power?

  1. If there is improper use of article 356 then the Court will provide remedy.

  2. Under article 356(3) it is the limitation on the powers of the President that it shall not take any irreversible action until the proclamation is approved by the Parliament, that is, he shall not dissolve the Assembly.

  3. Article 356 is justified only when there is a breakdown of Constitutional machinery and not Administrative machinery.

It should not be used very often by the Centre as it has the power to destroy the Constitutional structure between the State and the Centre. That is one of the reason that the Chairperson of the Drafting Committee, B R Ambedkar, referred to Article 356 as ‘Dead letter of the Indian Constitution’. It should only be used when there is actual necessity or breakdown of the State Government or any such thing of that sort. Also, It should be used in situations like where no party has a majority that is also famously called as Hung Assembly, where the majority party refuses to form a ministry and Governor is not able to find a coalition ministry commanding a majority in the assembly, where the state government does not go by the provisions laid down by the constitution and so on.

Therefore, the Centre should not be very relentless in imposing the President’s rule in the State. All the factors, circumstances, laws, provisions and lastly rules and regulations should be kept in mind. There should be no disregard and the assessment of everything should be present before using Article 356. It should not be used to only satisfy the whims and the fantasies of the Centre.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Section 58B of The Advocates Act - Special provision relating to certain disciplinary proceedings

 Section 58B The Advocates Act Description (1) As from the 1st day of September, 1963, every proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate of a High Court shall, save as provided in the first proviso to sub-section (2), be disposed of by the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if the existing advocate had been enrolled as an advocate on its roll. (2) If immediately before the said date, there is any proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate pending before any High Court under the Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926 (38 of 1926), such proceeding shall stand transferred to the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if it were a proceeding pending before the corresponding Bar Council under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 56: Provided that where in respect of any such proceeding the High Court has received the finding of a Tribunal constituted under section 11 of the Indian B

Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of ClaimantCase Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant. TOLLEY Vs, J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement. Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be asked to resign from his respective club. Furthermore, there was evidence that the possible adverse effects of the caricature on the claimant’s reputation were brought to the defendants’ attention. The trial judge found that the caricature could have a defamatory meaning. The jury then found in favor of the claimant. Held The House of Lords held that in the circumstances of this case – as explained by the facts – the caricature was capable of constituting defamation. In other words, the publication could have the meaning alleged by the claimant. The Lords also ordered a new trial limited to the assessment of damages. NEWSTEAD V LANDON EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD, (1939) Facts: A newspaper published a defamatory article about Harold Newstead. However, another person with this name brought an action in libel. He claimed that the article had been misunderstood as leading to him. The defendant newspaper recognised that they published the article. Also, they denied that they had the intention of being defamatory of him. Consequently, the claimant argued that the newspaper was under a duty. The duty was to give a clear and complete description of the correct person. Moreover, the claimant argued that the defendants were in breach of the duty. Issues: The issue in Newstead v London Express Newspaper, was if the reasonable persons would have understood the words complained of to refer to the plaintiff. Held: The Court of Appeal stated that in accordance with the current law on libel, liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer; but on the fact of the defamation. Accordingly, a reasonable man, in this case a newspaper publisher, must be aware of the possibility of individuals with the same name and must assume that the words published will be read by a reasonable man with reasonable care.

  Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant.  TOLLEY  Vs,  J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement.   Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be aske

Rules as to delivery of goods

                             Rules as to delivery of goods Section 2(2) of Sale of Goods Act defines ‘delivery’ as a ‘voluntary transfer of possession from one person to another.’ Thus, if the transfer of goods is not voluntary and is taken by theft, by fraud, or by force, then there is no ‘delivery. Moreover, the ‘delivery’ should have the effect of putting the goods in possession of the buyer. The essence of the delivery is a voluntary transfer of possession of goods from one person to another. There is no delivery of goods where they are obtained at pistol point or theft. 1. Mode of Delivery: According to Section 33, delivery of goods sold may be made by doing anything which the parties agree shall be treated as delivery or which has the effect of putting the goods in the possession of the buyer or of any person authorized to hold them on his behalf. Delivery of goods may be actual, symbolic or constructive. 2. Expenses of Delivery: According to Section 36(5), unless otherwise agree