NCLT: Suspended Directors Who are Prospective Resolution Applicants Cann’t Access Valuation Reports  ||  Supreme Court Clarifies Test For Granting Bail to Accused Added at Trial under Section 319 CrPC  ||  SC: Fresh Notification For Vijayawada ACB Police Station not Required After AP Bifurcation  ||  SC: Studying in a Government Institute Does Not Create an Automatic Right to a Government Job  ||  NCLT Mumbai: CIRP Claims Cannot Invoke the 12-Year Limitation Period For Enforcing Mortgage Rights  ||  NCLAT: Misnaming Guarantor as 'Director' in SARFAESI Notice Doesn't Void Guarantee Invocation  ||  Jharkhand HC: Mere Breach of Compromise Terms by an Accused Does Not Justify Bail Cancellation  ||  Cal HC: Banks Cannot Freeze a Company's Accounts Solely Due To ROC Labeling a 'Management Dispute'  ||  Rajasthan HC: Father’s Rape of His Daughter Transcends Ordinary Crime; Victim’s Testimony Suffices  ||  Delhi HC: Judge Who Reserved Judgment Must Deliver Verdict Despite Transfer; Successor Can't Rehear    

Union of India v. Harish Chandra Singh Rawat and Anr. - (22 Apr 2016)

President’s Rule in Uttarakhand to stay for now

Constitution

The Supreme Court put paid to hopes that President’s Rule in the State of Uttarakhand will be a short one. It stayed an order of the Uttarakhand High Court which purported a “floor test” for a vote of confidence, given the legislative assembly was suspended, not dissolved. Instead, the Apex court belayed the order till 27 April 2016, on which date it will hear the matter.

President’s Rule in Uttarakhand came about after the State’s Appropriation Bill for 2016 was passed by voice vote, and it is alleged, without a majority; opposition MLAs and nine MLAs of the ruling party in the State were opposed to the Bill. Subsequently, with further enquiries belong made, show cause notices to the nine MLAs from the ruling party were sent, after disqualification petitions were filed by the Chief Whip of the party. A vote of confidence was called for by the Governor: Chief Minister informing him of the same to have been scheduled for 28 March 2016. On 27 March 2016, however, the Union Cabinet imposed President’s Rule in the State.

Relevant : Harish Chandra Singh Rawat v. Union of India and Ors MANU/UC/0007/2016 S.R. Bommai and others v. Union of India and others MANU/SC/0444/1994

Tags : PRESIDENT’S RULE   UTTARAKHAND   APPROPRIATION BILL  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved