Which of the following are not necessarily the consequences of the proclamation of the President’s rule in a State?
1. Dissolution of the State Legislative Assembly
2. Removal of the Council of Ministers in the State
3. Dissolution of the local bodies
Select the correct answer using the code given below:
1 and 2 only
1 and 3 only
2 and 3 only
1, 2 and 3
Answer is Right!
Answer is Wrong!
This question was previously asked in
UPSC IAS – 2017
1. Dissolution of the State Legislative Assembly: The President can either suspend or dissolve the State Legislative Assembly. Suspension keeps the Assembly inoperative but not terminated, while dissolution terminates it permanently. Since dissolution is one option and not mandatory (suspension is the other), it is *not necessarily* a consequence.
2. Removal of the Council of Ministers in the State: When President’s Rule is imposed, the state government (headed by the Chief Minister and their Council of Ministers) is dismissed, and the executive powers of the state are exercised by the Central government through the Governor. This is a *necessary* consequence.
3. Dissolution of the local bodies: President’s Rule impacts the State government and Legislature. Local bodies like Panchayats and Municipalities function under state laws enacted under Parts IX and IXA of the Constitution, but President’s Rule at the state level does not automatically necessitate the dissolution of these constitutionally established local self-governments. This is *not necessarily* a consequence.