Article 361 is an exception to Article 14 (Right to Equality) of the Indian Constitution. The features are as follows:
1. The President or the Governor is not answerable to any court for the exercise of the powers and duties of his office.
2. No criminal proceedings shall be conducted against the President or the Governor during his term of office.
3. No arrest or imprisonment shall be made against the President or Governor during his term of office.
4. No civil proceedings shall be made against the President or the Governor during his term of office in respect of any act done by him in his personal capacity.
The President and Governor are the sole guardians of the country and states respectively so the absence of their rule will affect the country or the states.
In View of above legal provision , I think Supreme Court will find President's Rule In Uttarakhand lawful and repeal High Court Order and may even issue dictate for Chief Justice High Court to refrain from making adverse comment against the office of Governor of a state and President of India
2 comments:
All these provisiond pertain to President or Governor as an individual or a citizen of the country. However, in S R Bommai case, a full bench of Supreme Court had held that administrative actions of President are open to judicial review. Imposition of President's Rule in a state is an administrative action subject to judicial review. The appeal by Central Government cannot be therefore accepted mutatis mutandis.
All these provisiond pertain to President or Governor as an individual or a citizen of the country. However, in S R Bommai case, a full bench of Supreme Court had held that administrative actions of President are open to judicial review. Imposition of President's Rule in a state is an administrative action subject to judicial review. The appeal by Central Government cannot be therefore accepted mutatis mutandis.
Post a Comment