S.R. Bommai Vs Union of India (1994) 2 SCR 644: (1994) 3 SCC 1
Facts: The Governor of Karnataka had reported to the President that there were dissensions and 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 telex message. 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 Constitution.
Issues:
Whether the presidential exclamation issued under Article 365(1) is amendable to judicial review or not?
If yes, then what is the extent of judicial reviews, adding further, what is the nature of the presidential satisfaction? Subjective or objective? Judgment: The Supreme Court's verdict in the Bommai case sharply limited the constitutional power vested in the Central Government to dismiss a State government, but upheld the dismissal of four BJP Governments for going against the constitutional philosophy and provisions that were secular. The power conferred to the president by Article 365 is of grave nature and should not be used very frequently as used till date i.e. more than 100 times in 20 states. They must be subjected to the judicial review to an extent of checking the legal validity of the
A writ petition was filed challenging the validity of the Art 356 of the Constitution.
Issues:
Whether the presidential exclamation issued under Article 365(1) is amendable to judicial review or not?
If yes, then what is the extent of judicial reviews, adding further, what is the nature of the presidential satisfaction? Subjective or objective? Judgment: The Supreme Court's verdict in the Bommai case sharply limited the constitutional power vested in the Central Government to dismiss a State government, but upheld the dismissal of four BJP Governments for going against the constitutional philosophy and provisions that were secular. The power conferred to the president by Article 365 is of grave nature and should not be used very frequently as used till date i.e. more than 100 times in 20 states. They must be subjected to the judicial review to an extent of checking the legal validity of the