Suspense as President mulls Arunachal Pradesh Central Rule decision

Rajnath Singh meets Pranab Mukherjee

The Narendra Modi government has put the ball in the President’s court on the imposition of Central Rule in Arunachal Pradesh with Union home minister Rajnath Singh meeting President Pranab Mukherjee and submitting the decision of the Union Cabinet. The President is understood to have asked questions about the need and urgency to bring Arunachal Pradesh under Central Rule, especially as the Congress has moved the Supreme Court on the issue and the apex court is to hear the case on Wednesday.

While Mr Mukherjee is expected to take a view earliest by Tuesday, sources said he may even wait till Wednesday before a final order is issued.

The Cabinet’s decision is based on the report of the governor outlining six main points to establish that the state has plunged into a “constitutional crisis” necessitating the imposition of Central Rule.

While it is up to the President to seek further clarification from the government on its politically volatile decision, top government sources said the home minister has ensured all issues have been addressed before the President signs the notification for the same. “The government will not leave any room for doubt when it submits its case to the President,” a top government functionary said, indicating that all rough edges have been ironed out despite the Opposition Congress’ hue and cry.

Meanwhile, the Congress on Monday approached the President and also moved the Supreme Court challenging the Union Cabinet’s recommendation that President’s Rule be imposed in Arunachal Pradesh. The Congress, which is in power in the state, also sought to rally non-BJP chief ministers, alleging that the Modi government was “trampling” the Constitution.

Submitting the report to the President, the home ministry has said that various reports received from the Arunachal Pradesh governor establish that a constitutional breakdown has taken place on various fronts. These include “severe” deterioration of law and order; “flouting of the provisions of Article 167(b) of the Constitution as letters of the governor concerning issues of public importance were not being responded to”; “indiscipline, lawlessness, politicking by government officials by inciting, provoking and funding certain groups to publicly organise demonstrations for removal of incumbent governor”; and “communal politics by members of the government and the Speaker of the Assembly, using the state machinery, preventing the session of the Legislative Assembly being held in the Assembly premises even though the session had been summoned by the governor.”

“Locking of the Assembly is no less than locking of the Constitution of India itself,” officials said, quoting from the report.

According to the report, the governor, who is the nominee of the President, “is being publicly insulted and humiliated and the state administration is behaving as a silent spectator”. Lastly, the report says that “as per Article 174 of the Constitution, six months shall not intervene between the last sitting of the Legislative Assembly in one session and the date appointed for its first sitting in the next session”. According to one interpretation, the next session of the Assembly should have taken place latest by January 21 this year.

It clarifies that the Assembly session which took place on December 16 last year had been disputed, and even though this aspect is not under litigation, if the Supreme Court rules in favour of the interpretation that this Assembly session was not valid, then in any case there would be a constitutional breakdown because the requirement of Article 174(1) would have been breached. “On the other hand, if the Supreme Court holds that the December 16 session was valid, then it is clear that the current government is in a minority and is not allowing the testing of its majority. Therefore, in either case, the state is heading for a constitutional crisis,” it says.