RAMESHWAR PRASAD AND ORS. versus UNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

Citation: [2005] SUPP. 4 S.C.R. 152 · Decided: 07-10-2005 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: Y.K. SABHARWAL, K.G. BALAKRISHNAN, B.N. AGRAWAL, ASHOK BHAN, ARIJIT PASAYAT
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A 
RAMESHW AR PRASAD AND ORS. 
v. 
UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. 
OCTOBER 7, 2005 
B 
[Y.K. SABHARWAL, K.G. BALAKRISHNAN, B.N. AGRAWAL, 
ASHOK BHAN AND ARIJIT PASA YAT, JJ.] 
Constitution of India, 1950: 
C 
Articles 174(2)(b) and 356-Notification G.S.R. 162(£) dated 7.3.2005 
and Notification dated 23. 5.2005-Legislative Assembly of Bihar-Dissolution 
of-Held, The Proclamation dated 23rd May, 2005 dissolving the Legislative 
Assembly of the State of Bihar is unconstitutional-Despite unconstitutionality 
of the impugned Proclamation, but having regard to the facts and circumstances 
D of the case, the present is not a case where in exercise of discretionary 
jurisdiction the status quo ante deserves to be ordered to restore the Legislative 
Assembly as it stood on the date of Proclamation dated 7th March, 2005 
whereunder it was kept under suspended animation-Detailed reasons would 
follow. 
E 
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION 
Writ" Petition (C) No. 257 of 
2005. 
(Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India.) 
WITH 
F 
W.P. {C) No. 255 of 2005, 258 of 2005 and 353 of 2005. 
Soli J. Sorabjee and Ranjit Kumar, Maninder Singh, Ms.Pratibha M. 
Singh, Preetesh Kapur, Abhinav Mukherji, Sunil Fernandes, A.K. Prasad, 
Saurabh Mishra, Ms.Jaspreet Kaur, Satyajeet Kumar, Ms. Shweta Singh and 
G Ray Vikram Nath for the Petitioner in W.P.(C) No. 257/2005. 
H 
Syed Ali Ahmed, Syed Tanweer Ahmed, Girdhar Upadhyay, S.S. 
Bandyopadhyay, Syed Tanweer Akhtar and R.D. Upadhyay for the Petitioner 
in W.P.(C) No. 255/2005. 
152 
RAMESHWAR PRASAD v. UO.J. 
153 
Viplav Shanna, Petitioner-in-person in W.P.(C) No. 258/2005. 
A 
P.S. Narasimha, Sridhar Potaraju, Ananga Bhattacharya, Avijeet Kumar 
Lala and Asutosh Pandey, for Mis. P.S.N. & Co. for the Petitioner in W.P.(C) 
No: 353/2005. 
Milon K.Banerjee, Attorney General, Goolam E.Vahanvati, Solicitor B 
General, Gopal Subramaniam, Additional Solicitor General, B.K. Prasad, R.M. 
Shanna, Ms. Sushma Suri, Navin Prakash, Ms. Sandhya Goswami and Gaurav 
Agrawal for the Respondent. 
S. Muralidhar, S.K. Mendiratta and Amit Sharma for Election 
Commission of India. 
P.P. Rao, B.B. Singh and Kumar Rajesh Singh for State of Bihar. 
B.P. Yadav, Wahid Hussain and Mushtaq Ahmad for the Respondent 
in I.A. No. 8/2005 in W.P.(C) No. 257/2005. 
The following Order of the Court was delivered: 
ORDER 
The General Elections to the Legislative Assembly of Bihar were held 
c 
D 
m the month of February 2005. The Election Commission of India, in E 
pursuance of Section 73 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 in 
tenns of Notification dated 4th March, 2005 notified the names of the elected 
members. 
As no party or coalition of the parties was in a position to secure 122 
seats so as to have majority in the Assembly, the Governor of Bihar made a F 
report dated 6th March, 2005 to the President of India, whereupon in terms 
of Notification G.S.R.162(E) dated 7th March, 2005, issued in exercise of 
powers under Article 356 of the Constitution of India, the State was brought 
under President's Rule and the Assembly was kept in suspended animation. 
By another Notification G.S.R.163(E) of the same date, 7th March, 2005, it G 
was notified that all powers which have been assumed by the President of 
India, shall, subject to the superintendence direction and control of the 
President, be exercisable also by the Governor of the State. The Home Minister 
in a speech made on 21st March, 2005 when the Bihar Appropriation (Vote 
on Account) Bill, 2005 was being discussed in the Rajya Sabha said that the 
Government was not happy to impose President's Rule in Bihar and would H 
154 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2005) SUPP. 4 S.C.R. 
A have been happy if Government would have been formed by the elected 
representatives after the election. That was, however, not possible and, 
therefore, President's Rule was imposed. It was also said that the Government 
would not like to see that President's Rule is continued for a long time but 
it is for elected representatives to take steps in this respect; the Governor can 
ask them and request them and he would also request that the elected 
B representatives should talk to each other and create a situation in which it 
becomes possible for them to form a Government. The Presidential 
Proclamation dated 7th March, 2005 was approved by the Lok Sabha at its 
sitting held on 19th March, 2005 and Rajya Sabha at its sitting held on 21st 
March, 2005. 
c 
The Governor of Bihar made two reports to
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.