send mail to support@abhimanu.com mentioning your email id and mobileno registered with us! if details not recieved
Resend Opt after 60 Sec.
By Loging in you agree to Terms of Services and Privacy Policy
Claim your free MCQ
Please specify
Sorry for the inconvenience but we’re performing some maintenance at the moment. Website can be slow during this phase..
Please verify your mobile number
Login not allowed, Please logout from existing browser
Please update your name
Subscribe to Notifications
Stay updated with the latest Current affairs and other important updates regarding video Lectures, Test Schedules, live sessions etc..
Your Free user account at abhipedia has been created.
Remember, success is a journey, not a destination. Stay motivated and keep moving forward!
Refer & Earn
Enquire Now
My Abhipedia Earning
Kindly Login to view your earning
Support
The Indian Constitution, under Art.53, vests the executive power of the Union in the President, who shall exercise the executive power directly or through officers subordinate to him in accordance with the Constitution. He is the supreme commander of the Armed Forces. He is the first citizen of India and occupies the first position under the warrant of precedence. (Warrant of precedence indicates the hierarchy of positions occupied by various dignitaries attending a State function :)
The President of India is elected by indirect election. He is elected by an electoral college in accordance with the system or proportional representation by means of the single transferable vote. The Electoral College consists of:
(a) The elected member of both House of Parliament, and
(b) The elected member of the Legislative Assemblies of the State’ (Art.54). Here, as per the 70th Constitution (Amendment) Act. 1992, the expression ‘States’ includes the National Capital Territory of Delhi and the Union Territory of Pondicherry.
As far as practicable, there shall be uniformity of representation of the different states at the election, according to the population and the total number of elected member of the Legislative Assembly of each State, and parity shall also be maintained between the State, as a whole and the union (Art.55). The second condition seeks to ensure that the votes of the States, in the aggregate in the Electoral College for the election of the President shall be equal to that of the people of the country as a whole. In this way, the President shall be a representative, of the nation as well as a representative of the people in different States. The formula adopted to secure uniformity among the States is as follows
On the basis of the above formula, the value of the vote of an M.L.A. from U.P. has the highest value and that of Sikkim the lowest. The formula adopted to secure uniformity between all the States on one hand and the Parliament on the other is as follows:
Fraction exceeding one-half, in both the cases, will be counted as one, fraction less than one-half is omitted.
Article 59 in the Constitution Of India 1949
59. Conditions of Presidents office
(1) The President shall not be a member of either House of Parliament or of a House of the Legislature of any State, and if a member of either House of Parliament or of a House of the Legislature of any State be elected President, he shall be deemed to have vacated his seat in that House on the date on which he enters upon his office as President
(2) The President shall not hold any other office of profit
(3) The President shall be entitled without payment of rent to the use of his official residences and shall be also entitled to such emoluments, allowances and privileges as may be determined by Parliament by law and, until provision in that behalf is so made, such emoluments, allowances and privileges as are specified in the Second Schedule
(4) The emoluments and allowances of the President shall ot be diminished during his term of office
All doubts and disputes arising out of or in connection with the election of a President or Vice-President is inquired into and decided by the Supreme Court whose decision is final. Article 71 further states that no such dispute can be raised on the ground of any vacancy in the Electoral College, which elected the President or the Vice-President. If the election of the President or Vice-President is declared void by the Supreme Court, Act done by him prior to the date of such decision of the Supreme Court cannot be invalidated. Subject to the provision of the Constitution empowers the parliament to regulate by law any matter relating to or connected with the election of a president or Vice-President.
Art. 58 lays down the qualifications which a person must possess for being elected to the Office of the President of India: -
(a) He must be citizen of India.
(b) He must have completed the age of 35 years.
(c) He must be qualifies for elections a member of the House of the people.
(d) He must hot hold any office of profit under the Government of India or the Government of any State or under any local or other authority subject to the control of any of the said governments.
But the following persons shall not be deemed to hold any office of profit and hence qualifies or being a candidate for President ship. They are - (a) The President and Vice-President of the Union. (b) The Governor of any State. (c) The Minister of the Union or of any state.
A person who holds, or who has held office as President, shall be eligible for re-election as President.
The President shall not be a member of either House of the Parliament or of a House of the Legislature of any State, and if a member of either House of Parliament or of a House of the Legislature of any State, be elected President, he shall be deemed to have vacated his seat in that House on the date on which he enters upon his office as President. The President shall not hold any other office of profit.
The President is entitled without payment of rent to the use of his official residence and also to such emoluments not allowances and privileges as may be determined by Parliament by law. The Parliament by law has enhanced the monthly pay of the President from Rs. 50,000/- to Rs 1, 50,000/-. The emoluments and allowances of the President cannot be diminished during his term of office.
Art.56 says that the President shall hold office for a term of five years from the date on which he enters upon his office. Even after the expiry of his term he shall continue in office until his successor enters upon his office. He is also eligible or re-election. He may be elected for any number of terms. The President may, however, resign his office before the expiry of his normal term of five years by writing to the Vice-President. He may be removed from his office for violation of the Constitution by the process of impeachment. If the President resigns, dies or impeached i.e. when the office of the President falls vacant before the must be completed within six months after the vacancy has risen.
The President of India can be removed from his office before the expiry of his term by the process of impeachment. He can be impeached only for the violation of the Constitution. The power of impeachment of the President is vested in the Parliament. It is quasi-judicial procedure. The impeachment procedure against the President for the violation of the Constitution can be initiated in either House of the Parliament. The charge must come in the form of a proposal contained in a resolution, which must be signed by at least one-fourth of the total membership of the House. Before the resolution could be passed, a fourteen-day notice must be given to the President than two-third of the total membership of the House. Then the other House of the Parliament called the investigating House-investigates the charge by itself or causes the charge to be investigated. The President has the right to appear and to be represented as such investigation to defend himself. If, as a result of the investigation, the other House also passes a resolution supported by not less than two-third of the total membership of the House, declaring that the charge preferred against the President has been sustained, the President stands removed from his office from the date on which the investigating House passed the resolution.
The executive power of the Union, Art. 53 declares, shall be vested in the President and it shall be exercised by him either directly or through officers subordinate to him, but always in accordance with the Constitution. The expression “executive power” is nowhere defined in the Constitution. Ordinarily, it connotes the residue of the governmental functions that remain after Legislative and judicial functions are taken away. Broadly speaking, “executive function” comprises both determination of policy as well as carrying it into execution. This includes the initiation of legislation, the maintenance of order, the promotion of social and economic welfare, the direction of foreign policy, the carrying on or supervision of the general administration of the State. The executive power may, therefore, be shortly defined as the power of carrying the administration of the affairs of the State, excepting functions, which are vested by the Constitution in the Legislature and Judiciary. The power of President can be discussed under the following heads: -
All the executive functions of the Union are carried in the name of the President. Under the Constitution the President has the power to appoint: (i) the Prime Ministers of India. (ii) Other Ministers of the Union. (iii) The Attorney General of India. (iv) The Comptroller and Auditor-General of India. (v) The Judges of the Supreme Court. (vi) The Judges of the High Courts of the States. (vii) The Governor of a State. (viii) The Finance commission. (ix) The members of the Union Public Service Commission and Joint Commissioner for a group of States. (x) The Chief Election Commissioner and other members of the Election Commission. (xi) A Special Officer for the Scheduled Castes and Tribes etc. In fact every appointment of the Union government is made in the name of the President or under his authority.
The President shall also have the power to remove -
(i) His Ministers, individually;
(ii) Attorney-General of India;
(iii) the Governor of a State;
(iv) the Chairman or member of the Public Service Commission of the Union or of a State, on the report of the Supreme court;
(v) A Judge of the Supreme Court or of a High Court or the Election Commissioner or the Comptroller-General of India or an address of Parliament.
The Constitution vests the Supreme Command of the Armed Force in the hands of the President. He has the power to declare war and peace. But his military powers are subject to the regulation of law. The Parliament, therefore, has the power to regulate or control the exercise of such powers.
The President is an integral part of the Parliament.
(i) The President summons the Houses of Parliament at least twice a year, prorogues either House of Parliament and dissolves the Lok Sabha.
(ii) He nominates twelve members to the Rajya Sabha and may nominate two representatives of the Anglo-India community to the Lok Sabha.
(iii) He may address either House separately or both the Houses jointly. He may also send messages to either House of Parliament. At the commencement of every session in Parliament the President delivers an address corresponding to the Queen’s Speech from the Throne in the British Parliament.
(iv) Every Bill passed by the Parliament must receive the President’s assent before it can become an Act. The President may give his assent or withhold his assent form or return it for reconsideration by Parliament with his own suggestions, a bill other than a Money or Constitutional Amendment Bill. But if a bill is passed again by both the House of the Parliament with or without the amendments suggested by the President, the President is bound to give his assent to it.
(v) The President makes certain reports and statements to be laid before the Parliament. It is the duty of the President to cause to be laid before the Parliament—
“FINANCIAL POWERS”
The Annual Financial Statement (Budget) and the Supplementary Statement;
The report of the Auditor-General relating to the accounts of the Government of India;
The recommendations made by the Finance Commission;
The report of the Union Public Service Commission, explaining the reasons where any advice of the Commission has not been accepted;
The report of the Special Officer for Scheduled Castes and Tribes;
The report of the Commission on the backward classes;
The report of the Special Officer for linguistic minorities.
(vi) Certain Bills or Example; a Bill for the formation of new States or alteration of boundaries or a State, a Money Bill, a Financial Bill- need the President’s recommendation for introduction in the Parliament.
(Vii) The most important legislative power of the President is his power to promulgate Ordinances under Article 123. According to this, the President is empowered to promulgate Ordinances, when either or both the Houses or Parliament are not in session, if he is satisfied that circumstances exist compelling him to take immediate action. A Presidential ordinance has the same force and effect as an Act or Parliament. However, every such Ordinance should be laid before both Houses of Parliament and must be approved by both the House of Parliament and must be approved by both the House of the Parliament within six weeks from re-assembly of Houses. Failure to comply with this condition, or Parliamentary disapproval within the six weeks period, will make the Ordinance invalid. The President may also withdraw the Ordinance at any time he likes.
The President enjoys certain judicial powers. The President has the power to grant pardons, reprieves, respites or remission of punishment or to suspend, remit or commute conviction or the sentence of any person (i) in all Court Martial cases; (ii) in cases involving the breach of a Union Law; and (iii) in all cases where the sentence is a sentence of death (Art.72). He is the authority for pardoning a sentence of death.
The Constitution of India vests sovereign power in the President and governors. The governance in the Centre and states are carried out in the name of President and Governor respectively. A President is empowered with the power to pardon under Article 72 of the Indian Constitution. Article 72 says that the President shall have the power to grant pardons, reprieves, respites or remissions of punishment or to suspend, remit or commute the sentence of any person convicted of any offence.
The Article 72 reads:
(1) The President shall have the power to grant pardons, reprieves, respites or remission of punishment or to suspend remit or commute the sentence of any persons convicted of any offence-
(a) In all cases where the punishment or sentence is by a court martial;
(b) In all cases where the punishment or sentence is for an offence against any law relating to a matter to which the executive power of the Union extends;
(c) In all cases where the sentence is a sentence of death. (2) Nothing in sub- clause (a) of clause (1) shall after the power conferred by law on any officer of the Armed Forces of the Union to suspend, remit or commute a sentence passed by a Court Martial. (3) Nothing in sub-clause (c) of clause (1) shall affect the power to suspend remit or commute a sentence of death exercisable by the Governor of a State under any law for the time being in force.
The meaning of these terms is as follows:
Pardon: Complete pardon
Reprieve: Temporary suspension of sentence
Respite: awarding less sentence
Remission: Reducing amount of sentence
Commutation: Changing one punishment to another.
Similarly, as per article 161: Governor of a State has the power to grant pardons, reprieves, respites or remissions of punishment or to suspend, remit or commute the sentence of any person convicted of any offence against any law relating to a matter to which the executive power of the State extends.
Note that President can grant pardon to a person awarded death sentence. But Governor of State does not enjoy this power. The question is that whether this power to grant pardon is absolute or this power of pardon shall be exercised by the President on the advice of Council of Ministers.
The pardoning power of President is NOT absolute. It is governed by the advice of the Council of Ministers. This has not been discussed by the Constitution but is the practical truth.
Further, the Constitution does not provide for any mechanism to question the legality of decisions of President or governors exercising mercy jurisdiction. But the SC in Epuru Sudhakar case has given a small window for judicial review of the pardon powers of President and governors for the purpose of ruling out any arbitrariness.
The court has earlier held that court has retained the power of judicial review even on a matter which has been vested by the Constitution solely in the Executive.
This power is practically similar to the one exercised by the American President or the British Crown except to the extent that so far as American President is concerned, it is exercised by him as part of the Constitutional scheme while, the British Crown exercises the same as an act of grace as a part of his/her prerogative and just like the Indian President, on the ministerial advice. Thus, in Britain, this power is regarded as the royal prerogative of pardon exercised by the sovereign that is regarded as nothing more than an act of grace issuing from the sovereign. In contrast to this, in the USA, a pardon by the President is regarded not as a private act of grace, but certainly as a part of the Constitutional scheme. Therefore, the nature of the power exercised by the President of India in this regard under Article 72 of the Constitution is considered more analogous to the one exercised by the US President rather than that of the British Crown as was explained by the Apex Court in the famous case of Kehar Singh vs. Union of India-AIR-1989 (PM, Indira Gandhi assassination convict) in the following words:
“To any civilized society, there can be no attributes more important than the life and personal liberty of its members. In most civilized societies, the deprivation of personal liberty and the threat of the deprivation of life by the action of the state is regarded seriously and therefore, recourse is provided to the judicial organ for its protection. But there is always remaining the possibility of fallibility of human judgment even in the most trained mind and thus, it has been considered appropriate that in the matter of life and personal liberty, the protection should be extended by entrusting power further to some high authority to scrutinize the validity of the threatened denial of life or continued denial of personal liberty. The power so entrusted in the head of the state is a power belonging to the people of the country and thus is reposed in the highest dignitary of the state.”
Notwithstanding the nature and extent of the clemency power that the President of India exercises, one point that may not be overlooked that the exercise of this power on his part over time has not remained free from controversy. A number of questions have cropped up time and again before the Courts as regards the exercise of this power particularly with respect to the following aspects:
i) Does the President of India exercise any personal discretion in this regard or does he merely act as a Constitutional head (as he does in any other matter) in this matter too?
ii) Should he give a personal hearing to the convict or his lawyer before disposing of the matter of a mercy petition brought before him?
iii) Is the power to pardon or exercise thereof subject to any judicial review?
So far as question number one above is concerned, it has been judicially settled that although, the Constitution of India formally vests this power in the President of India, but he exercises this power, as he exercises any other power under the Indian Parliamentary scheme of things on the advice of his council of ministers particularly, on the advice of the Union Home Minister. This proposition was amply clarified by the Supreme Court in Maru Ram vs. Union of India- AIR-1980. Therefore, it is now a settled proposition of Law that in the exercise of his clemency power, the President cannot act in his discretion and take an independent decision thereby, directing the release of or refusing the release of any convict on his own.
Regarding the question number two as mentioned above, the Apex Court clarified the point in Kehar Singh case by concluding that there is no right as such available to the condemned prisoner to insist for an oral hearing before the President as the matter lies purely within the discretion of the President in this regard and thus, it is for him to decide how he will deal with the case at his hand. This proposition was laid down by the Court on the ground that the nature of proceedings before the President are purely of an executive character and thus, as and when the convicted person files his petition before him, it is for him to submit with the same to the President all the relevant and requisite information that would be necessary for the disposal of his petition.
With respect to question number three above, the Court ruled in some of the earlier cases that although, Article 72, vests in the highest executive very designedly and benignantly, the humane and vast jurisdiction to remit, reprieve, respite, commute or pardon the criminals on whom judicial sentences have been imposed, but then all public power, however, majestic the dignitary wielding it, shall always be exercised in good faith, with intelligent and informed care and honestly for the public welfare. Thus, finally in Maru Ram, the Court explicitly held that undoubtedly, the power of pardon vested in the President is very wide, it cannot run riot such that it could amount to have been exercised in some arbitrary manner or in a mala fide way. Clarifying the point further, the Court acknowledged the fact that the considerations for the exercise of power under Article 72 can be plenty as their occasions protean but if in any case, if this power seems to have been exercised on purely irrational, irrelevant or on malafide considerations, the Courts could examine the case and would intervene if necessary. Thus, the Court concluded that the power under Article 72 is not to be exercised on wholly irrelevant and irrational considerations and if it does seem to be so then, this power is definitely subjected to judicial review…
1. Absolute Veto: If the president rejects the bill, the bill never becomes the act. Bill is dead. President of India can use absolute veto on the following bills.
a) State bill, reserved by Governor for consideration of President (president) under Art – 200.
b) A Private Member bill, opposed by the Govt. but approved by the parliament. On such bill, CoMs may advice the President, to use absolute veto.
c) A bill which is considered by cabinet & sent to President and cabinet has resigned. New CoM advices President no to accept the bill, then absolute veto is exercised.
2. Qualified veto[1]: If a bill which was rejected by President for the1st time & the same bill is reapproved by parliament with 2/3rd majority, President Veto will be qualified.
3. Suspensive veto: If a bill which was rejected by President for the 1st time & same is reapproved by parliament with simple majority, President Veto is Suspensive implying that presidential veto is overridden by a re-passage of bill by same ordinary majority.
4. Pocket veto: When a bill is sent to President Assent, President maintains silence without expressing specific opinion indefinitely. This is pocket veto President of India enjoys.
President has no veto power in respect of constitutional amendment bill. The 24th Amendment Act 1971, made it obligatory for President to give his assent to constitutional amendment bill. Similarly in case of Money Bills president can either give his assent to a money bill or withhold his assent but cannot return it. Normally, President gives his assent as it is introduced in Parliament with his previous permission.
The President exercises certain extra-ordinary powers to deal with emergencies, which are as follows:
(i) The President, under Art.352, is given the power to make a proclamation of emergency on the grounds of threat to the security of India or any part thereof, by war, external aggression or armed rebellion. He can suspend the operation of fundamental rights (except Art.20 and 21)
(ii) The President is empowered to make a proclamation for taking over the administration of a State cannot be carried on in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution.
(iii) The President has the Power, when he is satisfied that the financial stability or credit of India or any part thereof is threatened, to declare a financial emergency. Any proclamation under the emergency powers of the President in order to be in operation beyond a certain period should be approved by the Parliament within the period so specified in the Constitution.
As the Head of the State, the President sends and received ambassadors and other diplomatic representatives. All treaties and international agreements are negotiated and concluded in the name of the President though subject to ratification by Parliament.
He can promulgate ordinances when both the Houses of the Parliament are not in session (Article 123). These ordinances must be approved by the Parliament within the six weeks of its reassembly. He can also withdraw an ordinance any time.
The ordinance can be effective, for a maximum period of 6 months and 6 weeks in case of non-approval by the Parliament. (This is a hypothetical possibility where we assume Parliament did not meet for 6 months.)
He lays the reports of the Comptroller and Auditor-General, the Union Public Service Commission, the Finance Commission, and others, before the Parliament.
On the grounds of security threat to India by war, external aggression or armed rebellion.
Emergency
a) He can give directions to any State with regard to the manner in which the States' Executive Powers are to be exercised.
b) He can modify the pattern of the distribution of financial resources between the Union and the States.
c) He can extend the normal tenure of the Lok Sabha by one year at a time.
d) He can suspend the Fundamental Rights of citizens except (i) the Right to protection in respect of conviction for offences (Art 20) and (ii) the Right to life and personal liberty (Art 21).
Article 19 can only be suspended in case of external emergency and not in the case of internal emergency (armed rebellion).
The Parliament can make laws on items mentioned in the State list during the period of National Emergency.
Such laws are valid upto a maximum period of six months after the expiry of the Emergency.
The President's rule is also known as the Constitutional Emergency or the State Emergency.
It can be proclaimed by the President on the failure of the Constitutional machinery in the State (Article 356), or failure to comply with or to give effect to the directions given by the Union (Article 365).
The President's rule can be imposed when the President is satisfied, on the basis of either a report of the State Governor or otherwise, that the Governance of the State cannot be carried on in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution.
The proclamation of the President's rule should be approved by the Parliament within two months. If approved, it remains in force for six months from the date of proclamation of the State Emergency.
It can be extended for a maximum period of three years with the approval of the Parliament every six months.
However, beyond the first year, it can be extended by six months at a time only when the following two conditions are fulfilled:
i) A proclamation of National Emergency should be in operation in the entire country, or in the whole or any part of the concerned State; and
ii) The Election Commission must certify that the general elections to the concerned State Legislative Assembly cannot be held on account of difficulties.
When the President's rule is imposed in a State, the President can assign to himself all or any of the functions of the State Government and all or any of the powers vested in the Governor or anybody or authority in the State.
He can declare that the powers of the State Legislature shall be exercisable by or under the authority of the Parliament.
He can authorize, when the Lok Sabha is not in session, expenditure from the Consolidated Fund of the State, pending the sanction of such expenditure by the Parliament.
He can promulgate ordinances for the administration of the State when the Houses of the Parliament are not in session.
The State Governor, on behalf of the President, carries on the State administration with the help of the advisors appointed by the President or the Chief Secretary of the State.
The President cannot interfere with the jurisdiction of the concerned State High Court.
The Constitutional status, position, powers and functions of the concerned State High Court are not affected by such a proclamation.
The President's rule has been imposed more than 100 times.
The President's rule has been imposed around 50 times during the period of Mrs. Indira Gandhi.
Financial Emergency
The President can proclaim Financial Emergency if he is satisfied that the financial stability or credit of India or any part thereof is threatened.
Such a proclamation must be approved by the Parliament within two months.
When a Financial Emergency is proclaimed, the President can give directions to the States to observe the canons of financial propriety.
He can issue directions for the reduction of salaries and allowances of all or any class of persons serving under the State.
He ensures that all Money Bills and other Financial Bills passed by the State Legislatures be reserved for his consideration.
He can issue directions for the reduction of salaries and allowances of all or any class of the persons serving in connection with the affairs of the Union, including the judges of the Supreme Court and the High Courts.
Financial Emergency has not been declared so far.
The Indian Constitution envisages a Parliamentary form of Government. Under such a system the President is the Head of the State but not the Head of the Government. The head of the Governments is the Prime Minister. Though the executive powers are vested in the President, he is constitutionally obliged to exercise his executive powers with the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers headed by the Prime Minister. The essence of the Parliamentary form of Government, therefore, is that in it the Head and the real executive powers are vested in the Council of Ministers, which is responsible to the Lower House. The Members of the Council of Ministers are necessarily members of the Legislature. The President cannot exercise his executive powers without the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers’ advice normal he do anything without its advice. Even after the dissolutions of the Lower House (Lok Sabha) the Council of Ministers is in existence to aid and advice the President in the exercise of his executive powers. It is obligatory on the President to have always a Council of Ministers. Wherever the Constitution requires the satisfaction of the President, it is not the personal satisfaction of the Council of Ministers. The President is bound by the advice rendered by the Council of Ministers enjoying the confidence of the Lok Sabha. If he ignores the advice or acts contrary to the advice of the Council of Ministers he can be impeached for the violation of the Constitution. He cannot dismiss the council of Ministers, having the solid support of the Lok Sabha, in his discretion. So long as the Council of Ministers has the confidence of the Lok Sabha, the President is literally bound by its advice and in reality it is the President who is cast in the role of an advisor. Thus, the President constitutionally Assembly, occupies the same position as the King or Queen under the English Constitution. He is the Head of the State but not the Executive. He is the symbol of the nation. His place in the governance of the country is more or less a ceremonial device or a seal by which nation’s decisions are made known.
President vis-à-vis the aid and advice tendered by the Council of Ministers, before and after the 42nd Amendment Act, 1976. Before the 42nd Amendment Act 1976, there was no provision in the Constitution, which made the advice of the Council of Ministers obligatory on the President. Art.74 merely stated before the 42nd Amendment Act, that there shall be a Council of Ministers, with the Prime Minister at the Head to aid and advice the President on the basis of the convention established under the English Parliamentary form of Government, which the Constitution of India has adopted. Further, the Supreme Court in a number of cases has held that as long as the Council of Ministers enjoyed the support of the Lok Sabha, the President is bound by the advice of the Council of Ministers. The 42nd Amendment Act, 1976, in order to put it beyond doubt amended Art.74 and made the advice of Council of Ministers constitutionally binding on the President. The 44th Amendment Act, 1978 further amended Art 74 by adding a proviso to it. Under the proviso, the President may require the Council of Ministers to reconsider such advice; but the President is bound to Act in accordance with the advice tendered after such reconsideration.
When the office of the President falls vacant due to the incumbent’s resignation, death or removal by impeachment, the Vice-President, or in his absence the senior most Judge of the Supreme Court acts as the President. The acting President enjoys all the powers and privileges of the President and is entitled to President’s pay and allowances. When the President is unable to discharge temporarily his functions owing to a long foreign tour or ill health etc. The Vice-President discharges his functions until the date on which the President resumes his duties.
Name of the President
Specification of the Tenure
1. Dr. Rajendra Prasad
Jan. 26, 1950 to May, 13, 1962
2.Dr. Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan
May 13, 1962 to May 13, 1967
3. Dr. Zakir Hussain
May 13, 1967 to May 3, 1969 (died)
4. Varahagiri Venkata Giri
May 3, 1969 to July 20, 1969 (Acting)
5. Justice Mohammad Hidayatullah
July 20, 1969 to Aug. 24, 1969 (Acting)
6. Varahagiri Venkata Giri
Aug. 24, 1969 to Aug. 24, 1974
7. Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed
Aug. 24, 1974 to Feb. 11, 1977 (died)
8. B.D. Jatti
Feb. 11, 1977 to July 25, 1977 (Acting)
9. Neelam Sanjeev Reddy
July 25, 1977 to July 25, 1982
10. GianiZail Singh
July 25, 1982 to July 25, 1987.
11. M. Hidayatullah
Oct. 6, 1982 to Oct. 31, 1982 (discharged-the functions of the President)
12. R. Venkatraman
July 25, 1987 to July 25, 1992
13. Dr. Shankar Dayal Sharma
July 25, 1992 to July 25, 1997
14. K.R. Narayanan
July 25, 1997 to July 25, 2002
15. A.P.J. Abdul Kalam
July 25, 2002 to July 25, 2007
16. Pratibha Patil
July 25, 2007 to July 25, 2012
17. Pranab Mukherjee
July 25, 2012 to July 25, 2017
18. Ram Nath Kovind
July 25, 2017 to till date
[1]India does not have qualified veto
By: Abhipedia ProfileResourcesReport error
Access to prime resources
New Courses