Explanation:

President’s rule and Judicial Review :

• When the President’s Rule is imposed in a state, the President dismisses the state council of ministers headed by the chief minister. The state governor, on behalf of the President, carries on the state administration with the help of the chief secretary of the state or the advisors appointed by the President.
• Further, the President either suspends or dissolves the state legislative assembly .
• The 38th Amendment Act of 1975 made the satisfaction of the President in invoking Article 356 fi nal and conclusive which could not be challenged in any court on any ground. But, this provision was subsequently deleted by the 44th Amendment Act of 1978 implying that the satisfaction of the President is not beyond judicial review. S. R Bommai case (1994)
• In S. R Bommai case (1994), the following propositions have been laid down by the Supreme Court on imposition of President’s Rule in a state under Article 356:
• The presidential proclamation imposing President’s Rule is subject to judicial review .
• The satisfaction of the President must be based on relevant material. The action of the President can be struck down by the court if it is based on irrelevant or extraneous grounds or if it was found to be malafide or perverse.
• Burden lies on the Centre to prove that relevant material exist to justify the imposition of the President’s Rule.
• The court cannot go into the correctness of the material or its adequacy but it can see whether it is relevant to the action.