President's rule can be imposed in a State if the government is not being run according to the provisions of the Constitution. State whether any of the following conditions are a fit case of imposition of President's rule in the State. Give reasons.
1. Two members of the State legislative assembly belonging to the main opposition party have been killed by criminals and the opposition is demanding dismissal of the State government.
2. Kidnapping of young children for ransom is on rise. The number of crimes against women are increasing.
3. No political party has secured majority in the recent elections of the State Legislative Assembly. It is feared that some MLAs from the other parties may be lured to support a political party in return for money.
4. Different political parties are ruling in the State and at the Centre and they are bitter opponents of each other.
5. More than 2000 people have been killed in the communal riots.
6. In the water dispute between the two States one State government refused to follow the decision of the Supreme Court.
1. Two members of the State Legislative assembly belonging to the main opposition party have been killed by criminals. It does not show that the constitutional machinery has failed or is on the verge of collapse. This cannot be construed as a reason for invoking Article 356.
2. Again these do not imply that the constitutional machinery has failed and are not the fit cases for invoking Article 356.
3. It is feared that some MLAs from the other parties may be lured to support a political party in return for money. Unless and until there is a substantive proof of horse trading, this situation can not be a fit core for the imposition of the President's Rule.
4. The very fact that two different parties are ruling in the State and at the Centre is the strength of federalism. Their being the bitter opponents of each other, is no excuse for the invocation of Article 356.
5. More then 2000 people have died in the communal riots. It clearly shows that a grave law and order problem exists in the state. It implies the complete failure of the constitutional machinery. The basic right to live is being violated. It may be a fit care for the imposition of Presidents Rule.
6. Inter State disputes comes under the original jurisdiction of Supreme Court. The state government has refused to follow the decision of the Supreme Court. It clearly shows that the administration in the state is being not carried out according to the Provision of the Constituton. It may be a fit case for the imposition of the President's Rule.
