Federalism & Article 356 Judicial Review•2 min read•(1994) 3 SCC 1

S.R. Bommai and Others v. Union of India and Others

Bench: Nine-Judge Constitution Bench (S. Ratnavel Pandian, A.M. Ahmadi, Kuldip Singh, J.S. Verma, P.B. Sawant, K. Ramaswamy, S.C. Agrawal, Yogeshwar Dayal & B.P. Jeevan Reddy, JJ.)
Constitutional & Constitution Bench Matters
Read the full judgment on Indian Kanoon
Core Legal Ratio Decidendi

"Article 356 is an extraordinary constitutional reserve subject to judicial review; the floor of the Legislative Assembly is the only constitutionally sanctioned arena to determine the majority of a government."

I
Step 1

Issues Before the Court

  1. (i)

    Whether the proclamation issued by the President under Article 356 imposing President's Rule and dissolving a State Legislative Assembly is justiciable and amenable to judicial review?

  2. (ii)

    What is the scope of 'material' on which the President forms the satisfaction that the government of a State cannot be carried on in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution?

  3. (iii)

    Are federalism and secularism part of the basic structure of the Constitution?

R
Step 2

Law & Rules Applicable

  1. (i)

    Constitution of India, Article 356 (Provisions in case of failure of constitutional machinery in States).

  2. (ii)

    Constitution of India, Article 74(2) (Council of Ministers advice not enquirable, but underlying material open to judicial scrutiny).

  3. (iii)

    The Basic Structure Doctrine (Federalism and Secularism).

A
Step 3

Application to Facts & Circumstances

Several state governments (Karnataka, Meghalaya, Nagaland, and later Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, Himachal Pradesh) were dismissed by the Central Government invoking Article 356.

The Supreme Court declared that Article 356 is an emergency power to be used only as a measure of last resort. The President's power is not absolute or unfettered.

While Article 74(2) bars inquiry into the actual ministerial advice tendered, courts can examine the objective material placed before the President to determine whether it is relevant, bona fide, and not based on malafides.

The Court mandated that the majority of an elected government can only be tested on the floor of the House (the 'Floor Test'), and not assessed by Governors in private chambers.

Crucially, the Court held that if the proclamation is held invalid, the Supreme Court possesses the power under Article 142 to revive the dissolved assembly and restore the dismissed state government.

C
Step 4

Conclusion & Ruling

  1. (i)

    Presidential proclamations under Article 356 are subject to judicial review for malafides, arbitrariness, or reliance on extraneous materials.

  2. (ii)

    Dissolution of the Legislative Assembly cannot take place until both Houses of Parliament have ratified the proclamation.

  3. (iii)

    Federalism and secularism are inviolable facets of the basic structure of the Constitution.

← All case law briefs