FAILURE OF CONSTITUTIONAL MACHINERY OF STATE.

List of Cases

Cases Citation

 Jyotirmoy Bose v. Union of India AIR 1971 Cal 122

 Bijayanand v. President of India AIR 1974 Ori 52

 State of Rajasthan v. Union of India AIR 1977 SC 1361.

 SR Bommai v. Union of India AIR 1994 SC 1918

1|Page
 Table of content

Topic Page No:

 Research Methodology 2
 Aim & Objective 2
 Research Questions 2
 Scope & Limitation 2
 Introduction 3
 Background 4
 Types of Emergency 4-5
 Meaning of failure of Constitutional Machinery 5-6
 Grounds of Imposition 6-7
 Parliamentary Approval& Duration 7-8
 Consequences of President’s Rule 8
 When State Legislature is suspended or dissolved 9
 Misuse of Power 10
 Article 356 in Practice 10-11
 Supreme Court Intervention 11
 Justiability Under Article 356 12-13
 Case laws 13-15
 Suggestions 15
 Conclusion 16
 Refrences 17

2|Page
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

The project work on “Failure of Constitutional Machinery of State” is based on doctrinal method
of research. I have considered various articles and write ups. Secondary sources have been used
i.e. books, articles, commentaries and internet The writing style is both descriptive and
analytical. The project is a result of extensive research work.

Aims and Objectives:

‘Failure of Constitutional Machinery of State’ The aim of the project is to present a detailed
study of the failure of constitutional machinery in the state and the development of Article 356
since the making of the constitution it also throws light on the misuse of this Article in India by
the central government. This project also states the relation between the Union And the State at
the time of President’s Rule.

Research Questions

 Q1) How and when Article 356 can be invoked?

 Q2) How this article has been misused & violates the federal structure of our
Constitution?
 Q3) What is the role of Union at the time of Presidents Rule?

Hypothesis

 Q1) Should Article 356 be abrogated or amended?

Scope and Limitations:

The four point on which special emphasis has been given in this research are:

 Extensive research
 Thorough study of books
 Broad research of the topic via internet.
 Complete Documentation.

3|Page
Introduction

Emergency under the constitution means a situation which is not a normal situation and need
urgent remedial action. If we go by the dictionary meaning of the word “Emergency” then it says
that it is a situation which possess an immediate risk and requires urgent attention to deliver
reasonable conditions of life. It is mandatory for the government to be prepared with all required
measures to safeguard its people from any kinds of crisis. Hence, the Government has been
conferred powers to be prepared for any such situations before it arrives. Even in the ancient
times the principle of necessity was well recognized and had played a significant role. India
being a democratic nation1, when reaches to such severe crisis situations cannot deal with them
in its normal process since it needs immediate action and therefore the president is given the
authority to proclaim emergency after he is satisfied and with the aid and advice of council of
ministers that it is the need of the hour. But that is the time when the president is the only
controlling authority and being a democratic state. It creates the assumption of giving
extraordinary powers in the hands of the president for protecting the civil and political rights
ensured to the citizens by the democratic nation. During emergency, all the fundamental rights of
a citizen or an individual are suspended, except Article 20 and 21 where Article 20 talks about
certain rights which include protection in respect of conviction for certain offences and these
protections include expost facto law , double jeopardy and right against self-incrimination .
Article 21 talks about Right to Life and Personal Liberty wherein every individual from its very
birth has a right to live a meaningful and dignified life. The object of the fundamental right under
Article 21 is to prevent encroachment upon personal liberty and deprivation of life except
according to procedure established by law. Right to life means the right to lead meaningful,
complete and dignified life. The fundamental rights are one of the pillars of the Indian
Constitution Article 21 being core and since then these rights constitute the basic structure so
they cannot be distorted or deprived off. In a situation like emergency since it is already a
situation difficult to handle these rights seize temporarily which revive once the proclamation
period ends.

1
Asmit Chitransh, available at http://jurip.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/Asmit-Chitransh.pd f , last visited on
02/02/18.

4|Page
Background

The emergency provisions are contained in part XVIII of the constitution, from Articles 352 to
360. The Article owes its genesis article 93 of The Government of India Act 1935, a section
which essentially dealt with the taking over of the Provincial Government by the Governor.
These provisions enable the Central Government to meet any abnormal situation effectively.
The rationality behind the incorporation of these provisions in the constitution is to safeguard the
sovereignty, unity, integrity, and security of the country, the democratic political system and the
Constitution.

During an emergency, the Central Government becomes all powerful and the states go into the
total control of the Centre. It converts the federal structure in to Unitary one without the formal
amendment of the Constitution. This kind of transformation of the political system from federal
structure during normal times to unitary during Emergency is a unique feature of the Indian
Constitution. In this context, Dr B.R. Ambedkar observed in the Constituent Assembly that:

‘All federal systems including American are placed in a tight mould of federalism. No matter
what the circumstances, it cannot change its form and shape. It can never be Unitary. On the
other hand, the Constitution of India can be unitary as well as federal according to the
requirements of time and circumstances. In normal times, it is framed to work as a federal
system. But in times of Emergency, it is so designed as to make it work as though it was a
unitary system’.

The constitution stimulates three types of emergencies:

 An emergency due to war, external aggression or armed rebellion (Article 352). This is
popularly known as ‘National Emergency’. However, the Constitution employs the
expression ‘Proclamation of Emergency’ 2to denote an emergency of this type.
 An Emergency due to failure of the constitutional machinery in the states (Article 356).
This is popularly known as ‘President’s Rule’. It is also known by two other names ‘State

2
M Laxmikanth, Indian Polity, 16.1, (4th ed.2013)

5|Page
 Emergency’ or ‘Constitutional Emergency’. However, the Constitution does not use the
word ‘emergency’ for this situation.
 Financial Emergency due to threat to the financial stability or credit of India. (article 360)

Meaning Of Failure of Failure of Constitutional Machinery Of State.

India adopted the Canadian model of federation which tilts the balance in favour of the Union.
The constitutional provisions empower the Union to give directions to the States in normal times
as well, because Article 355 enjoins on the Union the duty to protect States against any external
aggression and the internal disturbance3.

Aricle 3564 and Article 357 incorporated in the constitution of India gives the President , the
enormous power to impose president’s rule in any of the state where he on the receipt of the
report from the governor, or is satisfied that the situation has been arisen where state
Government fails to carry on in accordance with the provisions of the constitution. President may
by proclamation-

(a) assume to himself all or any of the functions of the Government of the State and all or any of
the powers vested in or exercisable by the Governor or any body or authority in the State other
than the Legislature of the State5;

(b) declare that the powers of the Legislature of the State shall be exercisable by or under the
authority of Parliament;

(c) make such incidental and consequential provisions as appear to the President to be necessary
or desirable for giving effect to the objects of the Proclamation, including provisions for
suspending in whole or in part the operation of any provisions of this Constitution relating to any
body or authority in the State.[Art 356 (1)].

3
Negi Mohita, The Meaning of Breakdown of Constitutional Machinery in India, available at
http://www.yourarticlelibrary.com/indian-constitution/the-meaning-of-breakdown-of-constitutional-machinery-
in-india/5517 , last visited on 02/02/18

4
Dr. Seema Sharma, Article 356 of the Constitution: A Critical Analysis,
available at http://lex-warrier.in/2014/04/article-356-constitution-critical-analysis/, (04/02/18)
5
Art. 356, the Constitution of India.

6|Page
This is an emergency provision where the Union Government may extend its power over the
state. Both the Houses of Parliament must ratify the proclamation of emergency and if any of the
House fails to ratify the proclamation with in two months the emergency may cease to operate. If
the Proclamation is ratified, the emergency will last long for six months.

Grounds of Imposition

The President’s Rule can be proclaimed under Article 356 on two grounds: one mentioned in the
Article 356 itself and another in Article 365:

1) Article 356 empowers the President to issue a proclamation, if he is satisfied that a

situation has been arisen in which the Government of a State cannot be carried on in
accordance with the provisions of the Constitution6. Notably, State Emergency or
President’s Rule can be invoked after a receipt of report submitted by the Governor of a
state to the President. Though Article 163(1) obliges the Governor to act according to the
advice tendered by his Council of Ministers excepting those matter with respect to which
the Constitution requires him to exercise his discretion, and because the furnishing of a
report under Article 356(1) is not so mentioned by the constitution as a function to be
exercised by him in his discretion, it is obvious that in the matter of the Governor
reporting to the President that there has been a breakdown of the Constitutional
machinery must necessarily be a matter in which the Governor cannot possibly act
according to the advice of the Council of Ministers. The reason is that as a result of such
report, if adverse, the State Government itself would be suspended, so that the
Governor’s Council of Ministers cannot be expected to sign their death warrant. In the
result, in making a report under Article 356(1), the Governor acts in his discretion, and as
an ‘agent’ of the President . 7
2) Article 365 says that whenever a state fails to comply with or to give effect to any
direction from the Centre, it will be lawful for the President to hold that a situation has
arisen in which the Government of the State cannot be carried on in accordance with the
provisions of the Constitution.

6
Supra 2, at 16.5.

7
Supra,1

7|Page
 3) No party in the Assembly has a majority in the State Legislative Assembly to be able to
form the government
4) A government may have majority support in the House, but it may function in a manner
which is contravention to the provision of Constitution.
5) Security of the State may be threatened by the widespread breakdown of law and order in
the States.
6) And this point is further debatable whether Art.356 can be revoked when there are
serious allegations of corruption against the C.M. and the Ministers in a State.8

Parliamentary Approval And Duration

A proclamation imposing President’s Rule must be approved by both the Houses of Parliament,
with in two from months from the date of its issue. However, if the Proclamation of President’s
Rule is issued at a time when the Lok Sabha has been dissolved or the dissolution of the Lok
Sabha takes place during the period of two months without approving the proclamation, then the
proclamation survives until 30 days from the first sitting of the Lok Sabha after its
reconstitution, provided the Rajya Sabha approves it in mean times.

If approved by both the Houses of Parliament, President’s Rule continues for six months. It can
be extended for a maximum period of three years with the approval of the Parliament after every
six months. However, if the dissolution of Lok Sabhha takes place during the period of six
months without approving the further continuation of the President’s Rule, then the proclamation
survives until 30 days from the first sitting of the Lok Sabha after its reconstitution but only
when Rajya Sabha has in the meantime approved its continuance9.

Every resolution approving the proclamation of President’s Rule or its continuation can be
passed by either House of Parliament only by simple majority that means a majority of the
members of that House present and voting.

The 44th Amendment Act of 1978 introduced a new provision to put restraint on the power of
Parliament to put restraint on the power of Parliament to extend a proclamation of President’s

8
M.P. Jain, Indian Constitutional Law,804, vol 1, (ed.5th 2003 )
9
Supra 2, at Pg. 16.6,

8|Page
Rule beyond one year. Thus it is provided that the President’s Rule can be extended by six
months at a time only when the following two conditions are fulfilled:

1) A proclamation of National Emergency should be in operation in the whole of India, or in

the whole or any part of the State and
2) The Election Commission must certify that the general elections to the legislative
Assembly of the concerned State cannot be held on account of difficulties.

A proclamation of President’s Rule may be revoked by the President at any time by a subsequent
proclamation. Such a proclamation does not require the parliament approval.

Consequences of Invoking President’s Rule

Under Article 356 (1)(a),The President can assume to himself the powers of the Governor.
acquires the following extraordinary powers when the President’s Rule is imposed in a State:

1) He can take up all the functions of the state government and powers vested in the
governor or any other executive authority in the state.
2) He can declare that the powers of the state legislature are to be exercised by the
Parliament.10
3) He can take all other necessary steps including the suspension of the constitutional
provisions relating to any body or authority in the State.

Therefore, when the President’s Rule is imposed in a state, the President dismisses the State
Council of Ministers headed by Chief Minister. The state governor on behalf of President, carries
on the State administration with the help of the chief secretary of the state or the advisors
appointed by the President, this is the reason why a proclamation under Article 356 is popularly
known as the imposition of President’s Rule in a state. Further, president either suspends or
dissolves the state legislative assembly. The parliament is one who passes the state legislative
bills and state budget at the time of emergency.

10
M.P. Jain, Indian Constitutional Law, 802, Vol 1, (ed.5th 2003 ) .

9|Page
When the state legislature is thus suspended or dissolved:

1) Under Article 357 (1)(a) The Parliament can delegate the power to make laws for the
state to the President or to any other authority specified by him in this regard,
2) The Parliament or in case of delegation, the President or any other specified authority
can make laws conferring powers and imposing duties on the Centre or its officers and
authorities. [Article 357(1)(b)]
3) The President can authorize when the Lok Sabha is not in session, expenditure from the
state consolidated fund pending its sanction by the Parliament [Article 357 (1)(c)]
4) The President can promulgate, when the Parliament is not in session, ordinances for the
governance of the state.

Thus, the life of law made by the Parliament or President during the the operation is not co-
terminus with the subsistence of the proclamation. This means that the law does not come to an
end automatically as soon as proclamation is revoked. It continues to be operative even after the
President’s Rule and is not revoked automatically the proclamation is revoked. This provision
means that though the power of Union to make laws for the State concerned on the subject with
in the State list ceases as soon as the proclamation under Article 356 (1) comes to an end , Under
Article 357 (2) the laws made during the existence of the proclamation continue to remain in
force until they are altered repealed by the State Legislature. State Legislature has a power to
change these laws.11

The President under Article 356(2) is not however authorized to assume himself the powers
vested in the concerned state High Court or suspend the provisions of the Constitution pertaining
to it. It means the constitutional position, status, powers and functions of the concerned state high
court remain same even during the President’s Rule. Such a proclamation may be revoked or
varied by a subsequent proclamation.12

11
Durga Das Basu, Constitutional Law of India, 689, (ed.8th ,2008)
12
Supra 8 , at 799,
.

10 | P a g e
Misuse of Article 356

If we talk about Article 356 of the Indian Constitution, then it says that the sole purpose of
giving wide powers to Union Government is basically to maintain law and order in the country
along with the preservation of the unity and integrity of the nation. In Indian politics the period
until 1967 has been described as the period of one dominant party system. During this period
the imposition of President’s Rule was not frequent the reason behind this was that the ruling
party at the Centre and in States was same and the disputes arising between them could be
resolved through the mechanism of the party set up. However,13 the fourth general elections
saw the emergence of a multiparty and this ends the monopoly of Congress. Thus Coalition
ministries were formed in a number of States for first time. From here began the saga of frequent
misuse of Article 356 for political ands thereby disturbing the federal structure of our
Constitution and endangering democracy in our country.

The provision which was thought as a safety valve proved to be a political weapon of the Centre
against the States. The provision which was intended to be the dead letter has proved to be the
death letter for number of State Government because different grounds which were never
thought by the framers of the Constitution have been used for the imposition of Presidents Rule
in the States to suit the political interests of the party in power at the Centre.

Aricle 356 In Practice

Sarkaria Commission notes14 that since 1950, the President’s Rule has been imposed on more
than 100 times occasions, that is on an average twice a year. Further, on member of occasions
the President’s Rule has been imposed in an arbitrary manner for political or personal reasons.
Hence, Article 356 has become one of the controversial and most criticised provision of the
Constitution.

For the first time, the President’s Rule was imposed in 1951. By now, all most all the states have
been brought under the President’s Rule, once or twice or more. 1970s and 1980s will be
remembered for the most spiteful use of Article 356. From the year 1971 -1984 it was used 59

13
Supra 4
14
Surendra Pandey, Article 356: its Use And Misuse, available at https://www.jagranjosh.com/current-
affairs/article-356-its-use-and-misuse-1459773624-1, last visited on 07/02/18

11 | P a g e
times with maximum being used in the period 1977-79 . When general elections were held to the
Lok Sabha in 1977 after the internal emergency, the ruling Congress lost and the Janta Party
came to power. The new Government headed by Morarji Desai imposed President’s Rule in nine
States where the Congress Party was in power on the ground that assemblies no longer
represented the wishes of electorate. When the Congress Party returned to power it did the same
in nine states on the same ground and imposed President’s Rule 17 times during 1980-8415.

Though Article 356 had been misused even by Jawaharlal Nehru16 to dismiss the majority
Communist government of Kerala, Indira Gandhi used this provision as a weapon against the
State Government. In fact, Indira Gandhi under 38th Amendment Act closed the concept of
judicial review at the time of State Emergency.

In 1992, President’s Rule was imposed in three BJP- ruled states (M.P., Himachal Pradesh,
and Rajasthan) by the Congress Party on the ground that they were not implementing sincerely
the ban imposed by the Centre on religious organisations.

Supreme Court Intervention

In 1994, the Supreme Court delivered the landmark17 SR BOMMAI judgment where the court
discussed the length provisions of Article 356 and related issues which reduced the scope for
misuse of Article 356 by establishing certain strict and mandating guidelines for imposing State
Emergency and as a result of which, since early 2000, the incidents of imposing President’s Rule
have dropped substantially. This case had huge impact on Centre-State Relations. According to
Sarkaria Commission, ‘Article 356 must be used “very sparingly” and “in extreme cases”
wherein there are no other viable alternatives to prevent complete failure of constitutional
machinery in the state. In Punjab and Jammu & Kashmir, State Emergency lasted for 3 years
which is the maximum till date.

15
Supra 2, at 16.8
16
Supra 14
17
Ibid

12 | P a g e
Justiciability of The Proclamation Under Article 356

From time to time, attempts have been made to bring the matter of invocation of Art. 356(1)
before the Courts for scrutiny but such attempts have not succeeded. In 1968, the ex- Chief
Minister of Haryana challenged the action of the Centre through a writ petition, but the High
Court dismissed the same on the following grounds :-

1) The Court cannot go into the validity of the proclamation because the president has
issued the same in the persuancce of his constitutional powers under Article 356(1) which
is not the executive action of the Union, and the Presitent himself is not answerable to the
jurisdiction of court in view of Art. 356(1).
2) The consideration of the proclamation has been specifically vested by the Constitution in
Parliament and excludes the jurisdiction of Court.
3) Regarding the argument of malafides against the Home Minister, the Court held that it
could no enquire in to the advice given by him to the President in view of Art. 74(2)
4) The report submitted by the Governor to President cannot be challenged or questioned in
the Court, as the court has no jurisdiction over it.18

In Jyotirmoy Bose v. Union of India19, the Calcutta high Court rejected a writ petition
challenging the President’s proclamation issued on March 19, 1970 under Art. 356. It was argued
that in making proclamation the President should have acted in his discretion and not on
ministerial advice. The Court by rejecting this pea has emphasised that in matter of proclamation
under Art 356 the President act as a constitutional head and must act in the advised given by
Council of Ministers.

Another important decision on this subject is that of Bijayanand v. President of India 20, where
the scope of judicial scrutiny of this Article was discussed in further detail. It was observed by
the Orissa High Court that the Governor, while sending his report to the President, is required to
act directly and not with the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers and whether such report
is mala fide or not cannot be questioned in a court of law because of the immunity provided to

18
Supra 8, at 811.
19
AIR 1971 Cal 122
20
AIR 1974 Ori 52

13 | P a g e
him as well as President under Article 361 clause 1. Hence, it was again decided in favour of the
Central action.

STATE OF RAJASTHAN V. UNION OF INDIA21

In 1977 when the general election of Lok Sabha was held in the country after the lifting of the
emergency of 1975, the congress party was badly routed in many of the states by the Janata Party
which won a large number of seat in the Lok Sabha and therefore it formed a government at the
Centre but it was not in power in any of the States. This means in these states Congress
ministers were functioning at the time and they still had the time to run for completion of the full
term .

The Central Home Minister, Charan Singh, wrote a letter to each of the Chief Minister of the
State mentioning that he should seek dissolution of the State Legislature from the governor and
obtain fresh mandate for the electorate. The state of Rajasthan along with other states filed an
original suit in the Supreme Court against the Union of India as per Article 131 asking the Court
to declare this directive of the Home Minister to be declared unconstitutional and illegal . It was
argued that the letter in question was to the invocation of Article 356 in these States and that the
dissolution of the State Legislature on the mentioned ground in the letter was prima facie outside
the perview of Article 356.

So, the Supreme Court dismissed the suit stating the Article 74(2) disables the Court from
inquiring into “the very existence or nature or contents” of ministerial advice to the President and
thus Article 356(5) makes it impossible for the court to question the President‟s satisfaction on
any ground unless and until resort to Article 356 in the given situation is shown to be grossly
“preserve and unreasonable”.22

21
AIR 1977 SC 1361.
22
DURGA DAS BASU, COMMENTARY ON THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, 11005 (Wadhwa And Company Law
Publishers 13th Edition).

14 | P a g e
SR BOMMAI v. UNION OF INDIA23

Facts

In Karnataka the Janta Party being the majority party in the State Legislature had formed
Government under the leadership of S.R. Bommai but it was by September 1988, Janta Dal
which was formed and mingled with the Janata Party and Lok Dal . The Ministry was added
thirteen members and in two days a legislator of Janata Dal defected from the party. The
Governor of Karnataka had reported to the President that there were defections in the existing
ruling party as nineteen letters were sent to him by the council of ministers from withdrawing
their support. He also stated that on the withdrawal of the support in the ruling party, the Chief
Minister S. R. Bommai also failed to call in for majority of assembly, which is inappropriate
under the Constitution. And so, the State is to be administered by the Centre. It was seen that
seven out of the nineteen legislators have complained about misrepresentation in their respective
letters and therefore, the Chief Minister and the Law Minister met the Governor the same day to
summon the Assembly to prove the confidence of assembly in his government. The same was
forwarded to the President through letter . But on the very same day, Governor has sent another
report stating that the Chief Minister has lost confidence of the majority of the House and
requested for President’s Proclamation under Art 356 and eventually the same was granted.

A writ petition was filed challenging the validity of the Art 356 of the Constitution24.

Judgment

Supreme Court has laid down the following prepositions on the imposition of President’s Rule.in
a State under Article 35625:

1) The presidential proclamation imposing President’s Rule is subject to judicial review.

2) The satisfaction of President must be based on the relevant material and it can be stuck
down if is based on irrelevant grounds or if it was found to be malafide or perverse.

23
AIR 1994 SC 1918
24
By Jeyapriya Rajendran, available at https://lawlex.org/lex-bulletin/case-study-s-r-bommai-v-union-of-
india/7821 last visited on 10/01/18.
25
Supra 2, at 16.8.

15 | P a g e
 3) Burden lies on the Centre to prove that relevant material should exist to justify the
imposition of President’s Rule.
4) If the Court holds the presidential proclamation to be unconstitutional it has power to
restore the dismissed state government and revive the state legislative assembly if it was
suspended or dissolved.
5) The state legislative assembly should be dissolved only after the Parliament has approved
the Presidential proclamation. Until such approval is given, the president can only
suspend the assembly. In case the Parliament fails to approve the proclamatoion, the
assembly would get reactivated.
6) Secularism is one of the basic feature of Indian Constitution. Hence, a state government
pursuing anti secular politics is liable to action under Article 356.
7) The question of state government losing the confidence of the legislative assembly should
be decided on the floor of the House and until that is done the ministry should not be
unseated.
8) Where a new party assumes power at the centre, it will not have the authority to dismiss
ministries formed by other parties in the states26.
9) The power under Article 356 is an exceptional power and should be used only
occasionally to meet the requirements of special situations.

Suggestions

As per my research, to prevent the misuse of Article 356 it should be amended instead of
abrogating it . It is suggested that the president’s satisfaction as envisaged by art. 356 should be
reached at after consultation with a five-member committee consisting of prime minister,
attorney general of India, chairman of Rajya sabha, leader of the opposition party in lok sabha
and the governor of the concerned state. it is also suggested that the corresponding provision
should be made for the union as well for the State, in such a case there is more chance of the
article being construed correctly and not being misused as in the past.

26
Ibid

16 | P a g e
Conclusion

It is the evident from the study that Article 356 was incorporated in our Constitution for
resolving the ministerial crisis in the State. The arbitrary usage of Article 356 would not only
result in destroying the federal nature of our constitution which is also one of the basic features
of the constitution but also hampers the democracy of our country. But this provision of
Constitution has been frequently misused by the parties at the Centre to achieve their political
ends. The hope and expression that this provision would remain a dead letter are belied. Since
the coming in to force of Constitution President’s Rule has been imposed on more than 100
occasions. The Union Government has not adopted a uniform pattern to invoke the President’s
Rule

There should be some effective mechanism to ensure limitation on the power with in the purview
of political pickups and should provide a way to safeguard the interest of general public. Judicial
review is a good safeguard to keep down the frequency of article 356 and act as a built in
mechanism to check the arbitrary powers available under the emergency provisions to the
Parliament and Executive.

It needs to be remembered that only the spirit of “cooperative federalism” can preserve the
balance between the Union and the States and promote the good of the people and not an attitude
of dominance or superiority. Under our constitutional system, no single entity can claim
superiority. So with the above analysis I would conclude that it is not good to abrogate a
provision which was inserted after a great deliberations. The best way is to retain it and practice
it with great caution as our Founding Fathers expected. This means while proclaiming State
emergency, the Union Government should keep in mind the interest and the ultimate benefit to
the people.

17 | P a g e
 Bibliography

 Indian Polity, 16.1, (4th ed.2013), M Laxmikanth.

 Indian Constitutional Law,, Vol 1, (ed.5th 2003 ), M.P. Jain.

 Constitutional Law of India, (ed.8th ,2008), Durga Das Basu.

Webliography

 Asmit Chitransh, available at http://jurip.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/Asmit-

Chitransh.pd f , last visited on 02/02/18.

 Negi Mohita, The Meaning of Breakdown of Constitutional Machinery in India,

available at http://www.yourarticlelibrary.com/indian-constitution/the-meaning-
of-breakdown-of-constitutional-machinery-in-india/5517 , last visited on 02/02/18

 Dr. Seema Sharma, Article 356 of the Constitution: A Critical Analysis,

available at http://lex-warrier.in/2014/04/article-356-constitution-critical-
analysi/, (04/02/18) .

 Surendra Pandey, Article 356: its Use And Misuse, available at

https://www.jagranjosh.com/current-affairs/article-356-its-use-and-misuse-
1459773624-1, last visited on 07/02/18

 By Jeyapriya Rajendran, available at https://lawlex.org/lex-bulletin/case-study-s-

r-bommai-v-union-of-india/7821 last visited on 10/01/18.

18 | P a g e
19 | P a g e
20 | P a g e