Top Stories

Centre to SC; Uttarakhand HC exceeded jurisdiction while quashing President's Rule; Hearing at 3.30 PM Today [Read Petition]

LiveLaw News Network
22 April 2016 9:22 AM GMT
Centre to SC; Uttarakhand HC exceeded jurisdiction while quashing Presidents Rule; Hearing at 3.30 PM Today [Read Petition]
Your free access to Live Law has expired
To read the article, get a premium account.
    Your Subscription Supports Independent Journalism
Subscription starts from
(For 6 Months)
Premium account gives you:
  • Unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments.
  • Reading experience of Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.
Already a subscriber?

The Centre today moved the Supreme Court against the Uttarakhand High Court judgment quashing the declaration of President’s Rule in the state.

Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi made an urgent mentioning of the petition before a bench of Justices Dipak Misra and S.K. Singh which sat in court number one in place of the Chief Justice-headed bench.

Chief Justice is absent from court as he is attending the three-day Chief Justices' Conference which began today.

As per the latest Report the Petition will be heard by a Bench headed by Bench headed by Justice Mishra at 3.30 PM Today

Rohatgi said the judgment was dictated in the courtroom by the High Court Bench but a copy is not yet out.


  • Grant leave to appeal against the impugned judgment dated 21.04.2016 passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Uttarakhand at Nainital.

  • Pass an ex-parte ad-interim order staying the operation and effect of the impugned judgment dated 21.04.2016 passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Uttarakhand at Nainital till the pendency and final disposal of the present Special Leave Petition

Centre in its appeal said the High Court has limited power of judicial review and could not have substituted President’s satisfaction with its own.

The government also said the court couldn’t have gone into authenticity and justifiability of the advice by council of ministers and the President’s rule.


  • “The impugned judgment passed by the High Court is contrary to the principles of law laid down by SC in relation to exercise of Article 356 of the Constitution of India. The impugned judgment deserves to be set aside. 

  • HC failed to appreciate that in view of the settled principles of law laid down by SC, the scope of judicial review of Presidential Proclamation issued under Article 356 is narrow and limited – the Hon’ble Court can only examine the relevancy of the material placed before the Hon’ble President of India; the adequacy, sufficiency, truth or correctness of the material cannot be looked into by the Hon’ble Court. 

  • Because the Hon’ble High Court failed to appreciate that the Hon’ble Court cannot sit as an appellate forum over the Proclamation which is issued by the Hon’ble President of India on his subjective satisfaction based on the material placed before him – including the report of the Hon’ble Governor and also otherwise. It is most respectfully submitted that it would be impermissible for the Hon’ble Court to substitute its own satisfaction in place of the satisfaction of the Hon’ble President of India.


The disqualified MLAs have also challenged the HC decision to keep them out of voting during the floor test.

The Uttarakhand High Court yesterday quashed the imposition of President’s rule in the State on March 27.

The High Court Bench led by Chief Justice K.M. Joseph ordered that a floor test be held in the Uttarakhand Assembly on April 29, 2016, where former Chief Minister Harish Rawat’s claim of having majority support shall be put to test.

The judgment came amidst apprehensions raised by former Chief Minister Harish Rawat in an application filed on April 7, 2016 in the High Court that the Centre may revoke the President's rule before the court's verdict and install a BJP government.

The Bench expressed its anguish at the Centre having behaved like a private party in a federal structure of governance enshrined in the Constitution.

“We are pained that the Central government can behave like this. How can you think of playing with the Court?” Justice Joseph said.

The court had said that it would be nothing shirt of a travesty of justice if the Centre revokes the President's rule and form a government.

Read the petition here.

Next Story