ISSN (Print) - 0012-9976 | ISSN (Online) - 2349-8846

A+| A| A-

Article 356

Article 356 I WAS quite dismayed by the editorial column in your issue of April 6 on Article 356 with reference to the Madras seminar in which Jyoti Basu and M Karunanidhi participated. Your contention that the Chauthala case is a clincher for not altogether abrogating Article 356 is unacceptable. Having 'arguably' lost his majority, Chauthala disregarded the governor's advice to prove it in the legislature. A little earlier, at the Centre, Chandra Shekhar having got into the same boat evaded the issue of proving his majority by resigning and recommending the dissolution of parliament. And, since there is no counterpart to Article 356 at the Centre, all that the president could do (and did) was to dissolve parliament, with Chandra Shekhar continuing in a caretaker capacity, after satisfying himself that no other party was able to form a government.

Dear reader,

To continue reading, become a subscriber.

Explore our attractive subscription offers.

Click here


(-) Hide

EPW looks forward to your comments. Please note that comments are moderated as per our comments policy. They may take some time to appear. A comment, if suitable, may be selected for publication in the Letters pages of EPW.

Back to Top