In S. R. Bommai v. Union of India, AIR 1994 SC 1918, the Supreme Court held that a Proclamation under Article 356:
Answer & Solution
Correct answer: C.
1. S. R. Bommai (1994) authoritatively settled that the proclamation of Emergency under Article 356 is subject to judicial review on grounds of mala fides, want of objective material, and constitutional violation.
2. The Court held that the Council of Ministers can be revived if the proclamation is set aside.
3. The 'objective material' standard ended the earlier view (Rajasthan v. UoI, 1977) treating it as essentially a political question.
4. The proclamation must be approved by Parliament under Article 356(3) within two months.
_Source: Constitution of India (Bare Act, updated to 105th Amendment Act 2021), Govt. of India Legislative Dept., S. R. Bommai v. Union of India, AIR 1994 SC 1918_
Related questions
In National Legal Services Authority (NALSA) v. Union of India, (2014) 5 SCC 438, the SuprThe Constitution (103rd Amendment) Act, 2019 — providing 10 per cent reservation for EconoArticle 131 of the Constitution confers on the Supreme Court of India:Which case overruled the proposition in A. K. Gopalan v. State of Madras, AIR 1950 SC 27 tArticles 280 (Finance Commission) and 281 (recommendations of the Finance Commission) beloThe Eleventh Schedule of the Constitution lists subjects that may be devolved by State LegArticles 243 to 243-O of the Constitution, inserted by the 73rd Amendment Act, 1992, deal The Sixth Schedule of the Constitution provides for the administration of tribal areas in