Why this matters now
S.R. Bommai is the most-tested case on federalism and Article 356. It is the chief authority on the limits of central power to dismiss state governments, the secular character of the Indian Constitution, and the role of the floor test.
Facts: 6 dismissed governments
S.R. Bommai was Chief Minister of Karnataka (Janata Dal, August 1988 to April 1989) when the Rajiv Gandhi government dismissed his government on 21 April 1989 on grounds that he had lost majority — without allowing him a floor test. Six state governments dismissed by various Centres between 1988 and 1992 (Karnataka, Meghalaya, Nagaland, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, Himachal Pradesh) had their dismissals challenged. The MP/Rajasthan/HP dismissals were of BJP governments after the Babri Masjid demolition (6 December 1992).
The verdict — 7 propositions
The 9-judge bench (5 majority opinions broadly aligned 6:3) held on 11 March 1994:
- President’s Rule under Article 356 is SUBJECT TO JUDICIAL REVIEW — courts can examine whether the “satisfaction” of the President was based on relevant material.
- Mala fide, perverse or extraneous use of Article 356 will be struck down. State of Mind cannot be sole basis.
- Floor test is the proper way to determine majority — NOT subjective satisfaction or Governor’s report alone.
- The Centre’s power to dissolve the Assembly under Art 356(1)(b) cannot be exercised before Parliamentary approval of the Proclamation.
- SECULARISM is part of the basic structure of the Constitution — a State government acting against the secular character can be dismissed (this addressed the post-Babri dismissals).
- Federalism is part of basic structure.
- If President’s Rule is struck down by court, the dismissed government can be RESTORED to office (the unique “revival” remedy).
Effect on Article 356 use
Before Bommai (1950-1994), Article 356 had been invoked over 100 times. After Bommai, the count fell sharply to about 20 invocations in 30 years — mostly when the Speaker’s decision on confidence was contested or there was a genuine constitutional breakdown. The Sarkaria Commission (1988) and Punchhi Commission (2010) recommendations — including using Article 355 first — have been substantially integrated into Bommai’s framework.
UPSC angle
Know S.R. Bommai v. Union of India 1994 — 9-judge bench 11 March 1994; challenge by dismissed CM Karnataka S.R. Bommai (Janata Dal, dismissed 21 Apr 1989 without floor test) + 5 other dismissed govts including post-Babri demolition BJP govts of MP/Rajasthan/HP; HELD President’s Rule under Art 356 is SUBJECT TO JUDICIAL REVIEW; mala fide/perverse/extraneous use struck down; FLOOR TEST is the proper way to determine majority (not Governor’s subjective satisfaction); Centre cannot dissolve Assembly before Parliamentary approval of Proclamation; SECULARISM is part of basic structure; FEDERALISM is basic structure; dismissed govt can be RESTORED if Proclamation struck down (revival remedy); Sarkaria + Punchhi recommendations integrated.
Frequently asked questions
Is President’s Rule under Article 356 subject to judicial review?
Yes — per S.R. Bommai 1994. Courts can examine whether the President’s satisfaction was based on relevant material.
What is the “floor test”?
The proper way to determine whether a government has majority — a vote in the legislative assembly. Mandated by Bommai as the only true measure of confidence.
Why is secularism a basic feature?
Per Bommai, it is part of the Preamble and pervades the entire constitutional scheme — a State government acting against secular principles can be dismissed.
What is the “revival” remedy?
If the SC strikes down a Proclamation under Art 356, the dismissed government is restored to office — even after Parliamentary approval. Unique to Indian constitutional law.