JUDGEMENT
-
(1.) I have had the privilege of going through
the erudite and scholarly judgments of my learned
brothers making an exhaustive and in-depth analysis,
evaluating the constitutional mechanism and exploring the
whole realm of constitutional imperatives as envisaged by
the Founding Fathers of the Indian Constitution on Central-
State relations and throwing abundant light on the
controversial role of State Governors inviting President's
Rule and the mode by which the Union Cabinet and Parliament
discharged their responsibility in this regard with
reference to Articles 74(2), 163, 355, 356, 357 and the
other allied constitutional provisions.
(2.) I find myself in agreement with the opinion of P.B.
Sawant, J. on his conclusions 1, 2 and 4 to 8 with which
B.P. Jeevan Reddy, J. concurs in his judgment (speaking for
himself and on behalf of S.C. Agrawal, J.) but so far as the
reasoning and other conclusions are concerned, I agree fully
with the judgment of B.P. Jeevan Reddy, J. Yet I would like
to give my brief opinion on the constitutional question of
substantial importance in relation to the powers of the
President to issue Proclamations under Article 356(1) of the
Constitution.
(3.) The Indian Constitution is both a legal and social
document. It provides a machinery for the governance of the
country. It also contains the ideals expected by the
nation. The political machinery created by the Constitution
is a means to the achieving of this ideal.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.