Constitutional Law - Article 355: A Test of States' Autonomy
constitutional judiciary intermediate pyq_discussionArticle 355 of the Indian Constitution provides that the Union shall ensure that the government of every state is carried on in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution. Consider the scenario where the government of a particular state is accused of not providing basic amenities to its citizens, leading to widespread suffering.
The question is: Can the Centre intervene under Article 355 and take over the administration of the state, thereby reducing the autonomy of the state government? This question requires a deep understanding of the concept of states' autonomy, the Centre-state dynamics, and the limitations of the Centre's powers under Article 355.
The correct approach is to analyze the Supreme Court's verdict in the State of Rajasthan v. Union of India (1977) case, where the Court held that the Centre's powers under Article 355 are not plenary and can be exercised only when there is a grave situation that threatens the stability of the state.
3 Comments
Arre yaar, don't lose heart. Art 355 is indeed a complex provision, but it's not all about Centre imposing its will on states. We need to understand its historical context and the Supreme Court's interpretations, like the Punjab Accords case. It's a balance between Centre's responsibility and states' autonomy. Keep reading, debating, and analysing, and you'll get the hang of it, abey!
Article 355 sabse bada issue hai because it says the Centre ka fundamental duty hai to protect states from external threats. But kya ye Centre ko state ki autonomy ka apmaan nahin karta? Some lawyers argue ki Centre ka right hai to intervene in state affairs when law and order situation deteriorates, but others say it's a gross infringement on state powers.
Yaaar, I completely disagree with Article 355. It undermines states' autonomy in a big way! By giving Parliament the power to assume control over a state, it basically strips the state governments of their authority. Don't you think this violates the basic principles of federalism? It's more of a 'Centre's dominance' than a safeguard for the country!