When news broke that the President’s rule had been imposed in the Union territory of Puducherry due to a loss of power during a confidence vote, many questions arose regarding the specifics of governance and administration in union territories. This article aims to shed light on those aspects, along with the implications of the President’s rule.
Administration of Union Territories: Key Points
According to the Indian Constitution, the administration of union territories falls under the jurisdiction of the President, as specified in Articles 239 to 242. An administrator appointed by the President oversees each union territory. The designations for an administrator can range from Lieutenant Governor to Chief Commissioner or Administrator.
Some union territories, like Puducherry (since 1963), Delhi (since 1992), and Jammu and Kashmir (since 2019), have a legislative assembly and council of ministers headed by a chief minister. However, this does not undermine the ultimate control of the President and Parliament.
The Parliament is bestowed with the power to make laws on any subject for these union territories according to the Government of Union Territories Act, 1963.
The Role of the 1963 Act in Case of Constitutional Machinery Failure
The 1963 Act sets out certain provisions to deal with situations where the administration of a union territory cannot function in accordance with the Act’s provisions. In such cases, the President may suspend the operation of all or part of this Act. Additionally, the President may implement incidental and consequential provisions for administering the Union territory in accordance with Article 239.
Understanding President’s Rule in a State
President’s Rule implies the suspension of a state government and the imposition of direct central control, also known as ‘State Emergency’ or ‘Constitutional Emergency’. It is enforced by invoking Article 356 of the Constitution on the advice of the Union Council of Ministers.
A proclamation imposing President’s Rule must be approved by both Houses of Parliament within two months from the date of its issuance. Initially valid for six months, it can be extended to a maximum period of three years with Parliament’s approval every six months.
During President’s Rule, the state administration is led by the state governor on behalf of the President, aided by the state’s chief secretary or advisors appointed by the President. The President may suspend or dissolve the state legislative assembly and declare the powers of the state legislature to be exercised by the Parliament.
Revoking the President’s Rule
The President’s Rule can be revoked any time by the President without requiring parliamentary approval. This often occurs when the leader of a party stakes a claim to form a government, presenting letters of support from a majority of Assembly members.
Recommendations and Judgments on President’s Rule
Over the years, various committees and commissions have proposed amendments and safeguards pertaining to the enforcement of the President’s Rule. These include recommendations from the Administrative Reforms Commission (1968), the Rajamannar Committee (1971), the Sarkaria Commission (1988), the S.R. Bommai Judgment (1994), Justice V.Chelliah Commission (2002), and the Punchhi commission (2007).
These judgements and recommendations primarily aim to ensure the judicious use of the President’s rule and prevent arbitrary actions by the central ruling party under Article 356. They also emphasize the need to maintain a stable constitutional setup in the states.
