Create a custom practice set
Pick category, difficulty, number of questions, and time limit. Start instantly with your own quiz.
Generate QuizGK Question
In SR Bommai v. Union of India (1994), the Supreme Court held that ______ test is the primary method to test whether a State government enjoys majority support in the Assembly, and Governor cannot dismiss Ministry without testing majority on Assembly floor.
- opinion poll
- floor
- judicial inquiry
- presidential reference
Answer: floor
SR Bommai (1994) floor test as democratic standard: (a) Context: Challenge to President's Rule imposition in States (Karnataka, Meghalaya, Nagaland) based on Governor's reports alleging loss of majority, anti-secular activities, (b) Supreme Court holding: (i) Floor test primary method to test majority; Governor cannot dismiss Ministry without testing majority on Assembly floor, (ii) Presidential satisfaction subject to judicial review; courts can examine if based on objective material, not political considerations, (iii) Secularism part of basic structure; State government acting against secularism can justify Article 356, (iv) Assembly dissolution not automatic; can be revived if proclamation invalidated, (c) Applications: (i) Hung Assembly scenarios: Governor must invite leader most likely to command majority, verify through floor test, not subjective assessment, (ii) Judicial review: Courts can examine Governor's report, Presidential satisfaction for objective material, constitutional compliance, (iii) Federal balance: Protects State autonomy against political misuse of Article 356, (d) Rationale: (i) Democratic legitimacy: Elected representatives, not appointed Governor, decide government fate, (ii) Constitutional morality: Governor as constitutional functionary, not political agent, (iii) Judicial oversight: Courts ensure Article 356 used for genuine constitutional breakdown, not political ends, (e) Illustrates constitutional federalism: Floor test as democratic standard ensures State governments reflect Assembly majority; judicial review protects State autonomy against arbitrary Centre overreach.