26.02.2021, LAW NOTES :* K. Selvaraj, Adv., *JUDICIAL REVIEW OF PROCLAMTION OF PRESIDENT’S RULE(continued)* *(2) If it has been made upon a

[2/25, 23:13] K. Selvaraj Mhc Advt: *26.02.2021, LAW NOTES :*
K. Selvaraj, Adv.,

*JUDICIAL REVIEW OF PROCLAMTION OF PRESIDENT’S RULE(continued)*

*(2) If it has been made upon a consideration which is wholly extraneous or irrelevant to the purpose for which the power under Art. 356 has been conferred by the Constitution and there is no “reasonable nexus” between the reasons disclosed and the satisfaction of the President.*

[(2006) 2 SCC 1]
Rameshwar Prasad Vs. U O I

*(3) If the exercise of the power under Art. 356 has been legal malafide.*

[(2005) 5 SCC 804]
Rameshwar Prasad Vs. U O I

*(4) It cannot be invoked on the ground of stringent financial exigencies or because of serious allegations of corruption. It cannot be exercised to sort out internal differences or intra party problems of the ruling party*

[(2006) 2 SCC 1]
Rameshwar Prasad (VI) Vs. U O I

*(5) Internal Disurbances cannot, by itself, be a ground for imposing President’s Rule, if it is not intertwined with a situation where the government of a state cannot be carried on in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution*

[(2016) 14 SCC 536]
Extra-Judicial Execution Victim Family Association Vs. U O I

*Dr. Ambedkar has said, ” The power under Art. 356 should not be abused to serve party intetests and it should be resorted to so sparingly that the Article ‘would remain a dead letter’ ” (Vol. IX Constituent Assembly Debates at page 177)*
[2/26, 06:51] Sekarreporter1: 💐

You may also like...