jbp123/hello · Datasets at Hugging Face

instruction stringlengths 1 84	input stringlengths 1 85	output stringlengths 1 83
Zonal Council Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, Kerala and	Puducherry	Table 15.3 Articles Related to Inter-State Relations at a Glance
Mutual Recognition of Public Acts, etc.	261. Public acts, records and judicial proceedings	Disputes Relating to Waters
262. Adjudication of disputes relating to waters of	inter-state rivers or river valleys	Co-ordination between States
263. Provisions with respect to an inter-state council	Inter-State Trade and Commerce	301. Freedom of trade, commerce and intercourse
302. Power of Parliament to impose restrictions on	trade, commerce and intercourse	303. Restrictions on the legislative powers of the
Union and of the states with regard to trade and	commerce	304. Restrictions on trade, commerce and intercourse
among states	305. Saving of existing laws and laws providing for	state monopolies
306. Power of certain states in Part B of the First	Schedule to impose restrictions on trade and	commerce (Repealed)
307. Appointment of authority for carrying out the	purposes of Articles 301 to 304	NOTES AND REFERENCES
1. Report of the Joint Parliamentary Committee. Select	Committee of the House of Lords appointed to join with a	Committee of the House of Commons to consider the
future Government of India.	2. M.P. Jain: Indian Constitutional Law, Wadhwa, Fourth	Edition, P. 382.
4. The Central Council of Indian Medicine and the Central	Council of Homoeopathy were set up under the Acts of	Parliament.
5. The Inter-State Council Order dated May 28, 1990.	6. For example, the Parliament has made the Essential	Commodities Act (1955). This Act enables the Central
government to control the production, supply and	distribution of certain essential commodities like	petroleum, coal, iron and steel and so on.
7. In USA such authority is known as the Inter-State	Commerce Commission.	8. It came into existence on August 8, 1972.
16 Emergency Provisions	T	he Emergency provisions are contained in Part XVIII of the
Constitution, from Articles 352 to 360. These provisions	enable the Central government to meet any abnormal	situation effectively. The rationality behind the incorporation of
these provisions in the Constitution is to safeguard the	sovereignty, unity, integrity and security of the country, the	democratic political system, and the Constitution.
During an Emergency, the Central government becomes all	powerful and the states go into the total control of the Centre. It	converts the federal structure into a unitary one without a formal
amendment of the Constitution. This kind of transformation of the	political system from federal during normal times to unitary during	Emergency is a unique feature of the Indian Constitution. In this
context, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar observed in the Constituent Assembly	that1 :	‘All federal systems including American are placed in a tight
mould of federalism. No matter what the circumstances, it	cannot change its form and shape. It can never be unitary. On	the other hand, the Constitution of India can be both unitary as
well as federal according to the requirements of time and	circumstances. In normal times, it is framed to work as a federal	system. But in times of Emergency, it is so designed as to make
it work as though it was a unitary system.’	The Constitution stipulates three types of emergencies:	1. An emergency due to war, external aggression or armed
rebellion2 (Article 352). This is popularly known as ‘National	Emergency’. However, the Constitution employs the	expression ‘proclamation of emergency’ to denote an
emergency of this type.	2. An Emergency due to the failure of the constitutional	machinery in the states (Article 356). This is popularly known
names–‘State Emergency’ or ‘constitutional Emergency’.	However, the Constitution does not use the word	‘emergency’ for this situation.
NATIONAL EMERGENCY	Grounds of Declaration	Under Article 352, the President can declare a national
emergency when the security of India or a part of it is threatened	by war or external aggression or armed rebellion. It may be noted	that the president can declare a national emergency even before
the actual occurrence of war or external aggression or armed	rebellion, if he is satisfied that there is an imminent danger.	The President can also issue different proclamations on
grounds of war, external aggression, armed rebellion, or imminent	danger thereof, whether or not there is a proclamation already	issued by him and such proclamation is in operation. This
provision was added by the 38th Amendment Act of 1975.	When a national emergency is declared on the ground of ‘war’	or ‘external aggression’, it is known as ‘External Emergency’. On
the other hand, when it is declared on the ground of ‘armed	rebellion’, it is known as ‘Internal Emergency’.	A proclamation of national emergency may be applicable to the
entire country or only a part of it. The 42nd Amendment Act of	1976 enabled the president to limit the operation of a National	Emergency to a specified part of India.
Originally, the Constitution mentioned ‘internal disturbance’ as	the third ground for the proclamation of a National Emergency, but	the expression was too vague and had a wider connotation.
Hence, the 44th Amendment Act of 1978 substituted the words	‘armed rebellion’ for ‘internal disturbance’. Thus, it is no longer	possible to declare a National Emergency on the ground of
‘internal disturbance’ as was done in 1975 by the Congress	government headed by Indira Gandhi.	The President, however, can proclaim a national emergency
only after receiving a written recommendation from the cabi-net3.	This means that the emergency can be declared only on the	concurrence of the cabinet and not merely on the advice of the
her cabinet. The cabinet was informed of the proclamation after it	was made, as a fait accompli. The 44th Amendment Act of 1978	introduced this safeguard to eliminate any possibility of the prime
minister alone taking a decision in this regard.	The 38th Amendment Act of 1975 made the declaration of a	National Emergency immune from the judicial review. But, this
provision was subsequently deleted by the 44th Amendment Act	of 1978. Further, in the Minerva Mills case4 , (1980), the Supreme	Court held that the proclamation of a national emergency can be
challenged in a court on the ground of malafide or that the	declaration was based on wholly extraneous and irrelevant facts	or is absurd or perverse.
Parliamentary Approval and Duration	The proclamation of Emergency must be approved by both the	Houses of Parliament within one month from the date of its issue.
Originally, the period allowed for approval by the Parliament was	two months, but was reduced by the 44th Amendment Act of	1978. However, if the proclamation of emergency is issued at a
time when the Lok Sabha has been dissolved or the dissolution of	the Lok Sabha takes place during the period of one month without	approving the proclamation, then the proclamation survives until
30 days from the first sitting of the Lok Sabha after its	reconstitution, provided the Rajya Sabha has in the meantime	approved it.
If approved by both the Houses of Parliament, the emergency	continues for six months, and can be extended to an indefinite	period with an approval of the Parliament for every six months.
This provision for periodical parliamentary approval was also	added by the 44th Amendment Act of 1978. Before that, the	emergency, once approved by the Parliament, could remain in
operation as long as the Executive (cabinet) desired. However, if	the dissolution of the Lok Sabha takes place during the period of	six months without approving the further continuance of
Emergency, then the proclamation survives until 30 days from the	first sitting of the Lok Sabha after its reconstitution, provided the	Rajya Sabha has in the mean-time approved its continuation.
Every resolution approving the proclamation of emergency or	its continuance must be passed by either House of Parliament by	a special majority, that is,
(a) a majority of the total membership of that house, and (b) a	majority of not less than two-thirds of the members of that	house present and voting. This special majority provision was
introduced by the 44th Amendment Act of 1978. Previously,	such resolution could be passed by a simple majority of the	Parliament.
Revocation of Proclamation	A proclamation of emergency may be revoked by the President at	any time by a subsequent proclamation. Such a proclamation
does not require the parliamentary approval.	Further, the President must revoke a proclamation if the Lok	Sabha passes a resolution disapproving its continuation. Again,
this safeguard was introduced by the 44th Amendment Act of	1978. Before the amendment, a proclamation could be revoked by	the president on his own and the Lok Sabha had no control in this
regard.	The 44th Amendment Act of 1978 also provided that, where	one-tenth of the total number of members of the Lok Sabha give a
written notice to the Speaker (or to the president if the House is	not in session), a special sitting of the House should be held	within 14 days for the purpose of considering a resolution
disapproving the continuation of the proclamation.	A resolution of disapproval is different from a resolution	approving the continuation of a proclamation in the following two
respects:	1. The first one is required to be passed by the Lok Sabha	only, while the second one needs to be passed by the both
Houses of Parliament.	2. The first one is to be adopted by a simple majority only,	while the second one needs to be adopted by a special
A proclamation of Emergency has drastic and wide ranging effects	on the political system. These consequences can be grouped into	three categories:
1. Effect on the Centre-state relations,	2. Effect on the life of the Lok Sabha and State assembly, and	3. Effect on the Fundamental Rights.
Effect on the Centre-State Relations	While a proclamation of Emergency is in force, the normal fabric	of the Centre-state relations undergoes a basic change. This can
be studied under three heads, namely, executive, legislative and	financial.	(a) Executive During a national emergency, the executive power
of the Centre extends to directing any state regarding the manner	in which its executive power is to be exercised. In normal times,	the Centre can give executive directions to a state only on certain
specified matters. However, during a national emergency, the	Centre becomes entitled to give executive directions to a state on	‘any’ matter. Thus, the state governments are brought under the
complete control of the Centre, though they are not suspended.	(b) Legislative During a national emergency, the Parliament	becomes empowered to make laws on any subject mentioned in
the State List. Although the legislative power of a state legislature	is not suspended, it becomes subject to the overriding power of	the Parliament. Thus, the normal distribution of the legislative
powers between the Centre and states is suspended, though the	state Legislatures are not suspended. In brief, the Constitution	becomes unitary rather than federal.
The laws made by Parliament on the state subjects during a	National Emergency become inoperative six months after the	emergency has ceased to operate.
Notably, while a proclamation of national emergency is in	operation, the President can issue ordinances on the state	subjects also, if the Parliament is not in session.
Further, the Parliament can confer powers and impose duties	upon the Centre or its officers and authorities in respect of matters	outside the Union List, in order to carry out the laws made by it
under its extended jurisdiction as a result of the proclamation of a	National Emergency.	The 42nd Amendment Act of 1976 provided that the two
consequences mentioned above (executive and legislative)	extends not only to a state where the Emergency is in operation	but also to any other state.
(c) Financial While a proclamation of national emergency is in	operation, the President can modify the constitutional distribution	of revenues between the centre and the states. This means that
the president can either reduce or cancel the transfer of finances	from Centre to the states. Such modification continues till the end	of the financial year in which the Emergency ceases to operate.
Also, every such order of the President has to be laid before both	the Houses of Parliament.	Effect on the Life of the Lok Sabha and State Assembly
While a proclamation of National Emergency is in operation, the	life of the Lok Sabha may be extended beyond its normal term	(five years) by a law of Parliament for one year at a time (for any
length of time). However, this extension cannot continue beyond a	period of six months after the emergency has ceased to operate.	For example, the term of the Fifth Lok Sabha (1971–1977) was
extended two times by one year at a time5 .	Similarly, the Parliament may extend the normal tenure of a	state legislative assembly (five years) by one year each time (for
any length of time) during a national emergency, subject to a	maximum period of six months after the Emergency has ceased to	operate.
Effect on the Fundamental Rights	Articles 358 and 359 describe the effect of a National Emergency	on the Fundamental Rights. Article 358 deals with the suspension
of the Fundamental Rights guaranteed by Article 19, while Article	359 deals with the suspension of other Fundamental Rights	(except those guaranteed by Articles 20 and 21). These two
According to Article 358, when a proclamation of national	emergency is made, the six Fundamental Rights under Article 19	are automatically suspended. No separate order for their
suspension is required.	While a proclamation of national emergency is in operation, the	state is freed from the restrictions imposed by Article 19. In other
words, the state can make any law or can take any executive	action abridging or taking away the six Fundamental Rights	guaranteed by Article 19. Any such law or executive action cannot
be challenged on the ground that they are inconsistent with the six	Fundamental Rights guaranteed by Article 19. When the National	Emergency ceases to operate, Article 19 automatically revives
and comes into force. Any law made during Emergency, to the	extent of inconsistency with Article 19, ceases to have effect.	However, no remedy lies for anything done during the Emergency
even after the Emergency expires. This means that the legislative	and executive actions taken during the emergency cannot be	challenged even after the Emergency ceases to operate.
The 44th Amendment Act of 1978 restricted the scope of Article	358 in two ways. Firstly, the six Fundamental Rights under Article	19 can be suspended only when the National Emergency is
declared on the ground of war or external aggression and not on	the ground of armed rebellion. Secondly, only those laws which	are related with the Emergency are protected from being
challenged and not other laws. Also, the executive action taken	only under such a law is protected.	(b) Suspension of other Fundamental Rights
Article 359 authorises the president to suspend the right to move	any court for the enforcement of Fundamental Rights during a	National Emergency. This means that under Article 359, the
Fundamental Rights as such are not suspended, but only their	enforcement. The said rights are theoretically alive but the right to	seek remedy is suspended. The suspension of enforcement
relates to only those Fundamental Rights that are specified in the	Presidential Order. Further, the suspension could be for the period	during the operation of emergency or for a shorter period as
the whole or any part of the country. It should be laid before each	House of Parliament for approval.	While a Presidential Order is in force, the State can make any
law or can take any executive action abridging or taking away the	specified Fundamental Rights. Any such law or executive action	cannot be challenged on the ground that they are inconsistent
with the specified Fundamental Rights. When the Order ceases to	operate, any law so made, to the extent of inconsistency with the	specified Fundamental Rights, ceases to have effect. But no
remedy lies for anything done during the operation of the order	even after the order ceases to operate. This means that the	legislative and executive actions taken during the operation of the

Zonal Council Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, Kerala and

Puducherry

Table 15.3 Articles Related to Inter-State Relations at a Glance

Mutual Recognition of Public Acts, etc.

261. Public acts, records and judicial proceedings

Disputes Relating to Waters

262. Adjudication of disputes relating to waters of

inter-state rivers or river valleys

Co-ordination between States

263. Provisions with respect to an inter-state council

Inter-State Trade and Commerce

301. Freedom of trade, commerce and intercourse

302. Power of Parliament to impose restrictions on

trade, commerce and intercourse

303. Restrictions on the legislative powers of the

Union and of the states with regard to trade and

commerce

304. Restrictions on trade, commerce and intercourse

among states

305. Saving of existing laws and laws providing for

state monopolies

306. Power of certain states in Part B of the First

Schedule to impose restrictions on trade and

commerce (Repealed)

307. Appointment of authority for carrying out the

purposes of Articles 301 to 304

NOTES AND REFERENCES

1. Report of the Joint Parliamentary Committee. Select

Committee of the House of Lords appointed to join with a

Committee of the House of Commons to consider the

future Government of India.

2. M.P. Jain: Indian Constitutional Law, Wadhwa, Fourth

Edition, P. 382.

4. The Central Council of Indian Medicine and the Central

Council of Homoeopathy were set up under the Acts of

Parliament.

5. The Inter-State Council Order dated May 28, 1990.

6. For example, the Parliament has made the Essential

Commodities Act (1955). This Act enables the Central

government to control the production, supply and

distribution of certain essential commodities like

petroleum, coal, iron and steel and so on.

7. In USA such authority is known as the Inter-State

Commerce Commission.

8. It came into existence on August 8, 1972.

16 Emergency Provisions

T

he Emergency provisions are contained in Part XVIII of the

Constitution, from Articles 352 to 360. These provisions

enable the Central government to meet any abnormal

situation effectively. The rationality behind the incorporation of

these provisions in the Constitution is to safeguard the

sovereignty, unity, integrity and security of the country, the

democratic political system, and the Constitution.

During an Emergency, the Central government becomes all

powerful and the states go into the total control of the Centre. It

converts the federal structure into a unitary one without a formal

amendment of the Constitution. This kind of transformation of the

political system from federal during normal times to unitary during

Emergency is a unique feature of the Indian Constitution. In this

context, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar observed in the Constituent Assembly

that1 :

‘All federal systems including American are placed in a tight

mould of federalism. No matter what the circumstances, it

cannot change its form and shape. It can never be unitary. On

the other hand, the Constitution of India can be both unitary as

well as federal according to the requirements of time and

circumstances. In normal times, it is framed to work as a federal

system. But in times of Emergency, it is so designed as to make

it work as though it was a unitary system.’

The Constitution stipulates three types of emergencies:

1. An emergency due to war, external aggression or armed

rebellion2 (Article 352). This is popularly known as ‘National

Emergency’. However, the Constitution employs the

expression ‘proclamation of emergency’ to denote an

emergency of this type.

2. An Emergency due to the failure of the constitutional

machinery in the states (Article 356). This is popularly known

names–‘State Emergency’ or ‘constitutional Emergency’.

However, the Constitution does not use the word

‘emergency’ for this situation.

NATIONAL EMERGENCY

Grounds of Declaration

Under Article 352, the President can declare a national

emergency when the security of India or a part of it is threatened

by war or external aggression or armed rebellion. It may be noted

that the president can declare a national emergency even before

the actual occurrence of war or external aggression or armed

rebellion, if he is satisfied that there is an imminent danger.

The President can also issue different proclamations on

grounds of war, external aggression, armed rebellion, or imminent

danger thereof, whether or not there is a proclamation already

issued by him and such proclamation is in operation. This

provision was added by the 38th Amendment Act of 1975.

When a national emergency is declared on the ground of ‘war’

or ‘external aggression’, it is known as ‘External Emergency’. On

the other hand, when it is declared on the ground of ‘armed

rebellion’, it is known as ‘Internal Emergency’.

A proclamation of national emergency may be applicable to the

entire country or only a part of it. The 42nd Amendment Act of

1976 enabled the president to limit the operation of a National

Emergency to a specified part of India.

Originally, the Constitution mentioned ‘internal disturbance’ as

the third ground for the proclamation of a National Emergency, but

the expression was too vague and had a wider connotation.

Hence, the 44th Amendment Act of 1978 substituted the words

‘armed rebellion’ for ‘internal disturbance’. Thus, it is no longer

possible to declare a National Emergency on the ground of

‘internal disturbance’ as was done in 1975 by the Congress

government headed by Indira Gandhi.

The President, however, can proclaim a national emergency

only after receiving a written recommendation from the cabi-net3.

This means that the emergency can be declared only on the

concurrence of the cabinet and not merely on the advice of the

her cabinet. The cabinet was informed of the proclamation after it

was made, as a fait accompli. The 44th Amendment Act of 1978

introduced this safeguard to eliminate any possibility of the prime

minister alone taking a decision in this regard.

The 38th Amendment Act of 1975 made the declaration of a

National Emergency immune from the judicial review. But, this

provision was subsequently deleted by the 44th Amendment Act

of 1978. Further, in the Minerva Mills case4 , (1980), the Supreme

Court held that the proclamation of a national emergency can be

challenged in a court on the ground of malafide or that the

declaration was based on wholly extraneous and irrelevant facts

or is absurd or perverse.

Parliamentary Approval and Duration

The proclamation of Emergency must be approved by both the

Houses of Parliament within one month from the date of its issue.

Originally, the period allowed for approval by the Parliament was

two months, but was reduced by the 44th Amendment Act of

1978. However, if the proclamation of emergency is issued at a

time when the Lok Sabha has been dissolved or the dissolution of

the Lok Sabha takes place during the period of one month without

approving the proclamation, then the proclamation survives until

30 days from the first sitting of the Lok Sabha after its

reconstitution, provided the Rajya Sabha has in the meantime

approved it.

If approved by both the Houses of Parliament, the emergency

continues for six months, and can be extended to an indefinite

period with an approval of the Parliament for every six months.

This provision for periodical parliamentary approval was also

added by the 44th Amendment Act of 1978. Before that, the

emergency, once approved by the Parliament, could remain in

operation as long as the Executive (cabinet) desired. However, if

the dissolution of the Lok Sabha takes place during the period of

six months without approving the further continuance of

Emergency, then the proclamation survives until 30 days from the

first sitting of the Lok Sabha after its reconstitution, provided the

Rajya Sabha has in the mean-time approved its continuation.

Every resolution approving the proclamation of emergency or

its continuance must be passed by either House of Parliament by

a special majority, that is,

(a) a majority of the total membership of that house, and (b) a

majority of not less than two-thirds of the members of that

house present and voting. This special majority provision was

introduced by the 44th Amendment Act of 1978. Previously,

such resolution could be passed by a simple majority of the

Parliament.

Revocation of Proclamation

A proclamation of emergency may be revoked by the President at

any time by a subsequent proclamation. Such a proclamation

does not require the parliamentary approval.

Further, the President must revoke a proclamation if the Lok

Sabha passes a resolution disapproving its continuation. Again,

this safeguard was introduced by the 44th Amendment Act of

1978. Before the amendment, a proclamation could be revoked by

the president on his own and the Lok Sabha had no control in this

regard.

The 44th Amendment Act of 1978 also provided that, where

one-tenth of the total number of members of the Lok Sabha give a

written notice to the Speaker (or to the president if the House is

not in session), a special sitting of the House should be held

within 14 days for the purpose of considering a resolution

disapproving the continuation of the proclamation.

A resolution of disapproval is different from a resolution

approving the continuation of a proclamation in the following two

respects:

1. The first one is required to be passed by the Lok Sabha

only, while the second one needs to be passed by the both

Houses of Parliament.

2. The first one is to be adopted by a simple majority only,

while the second one needs to be adopted by a special

A proclamation of Emergency has drastic and wide ranging effects

on the political system. These consequences can be grouped into

three categories:

1. Effect on the Centre-state relations,

2. Effect on the life of the Lok Sabha and State assembly, and

3. Effect on the Fundamental Rights.

Effect on the Centre-State Relations

While a proclamation of Emergency is in force, the normal fabric

of the Centre-state relations undergoes a basic change. This can

be studied under three heads, namely, executive, legislative and

financial.

(a) Executive During a national emergency, the executive power

of the Centre extends to directing any state regarding the manner

in which its executive power is to be exercised. In normal times,

the Centre can give executive directions to a state only on certain

specified matters. However, during a national emergency, the

Centre becomes entitled to give executive directions to a state on

‘any’ matter. Thus, the state governments are brought under the

complete control of the Centre, though they are not suspended.

(b) Legislative During a national emergency, the Parliament

becomes empowered to make laws on any subject mentioned in

the State List. Although the legislative power of a state legislature

is not suspended, it becomes subject to the overriding power of

the Parliament. Thus, the normal distribution of the legislative

powers between the Centre and states is suspended, though the

state Legislatures are not suspended. In brief, the Constitution

becomes unitary rather than federal.

The laws made by Parliament on the state subjects during a

National Emergency become inoperative six months after the

emergency has ceased to operate.

Notably, while a proclamation of national emergency is in

operation, the President can issue ordinances on the state

subjects also, if the Parliament is not in session.

Further, the Parliament can confer powers and impose duties

upon the Centre or its officers and authorities in respect of matters

outside the Union List, in order to carry out the laws made by it

under its extended jurisdiction as a result of the proclamation of a

National Emergency.

The 42nd Amendment Act of 1976 provided that the two

consequences mentioned above (executive and legislative)

extends not only to a state where the Emergency is in operation

but also to any other state.

(c) Financial While a proclamation of national emergency is in

operation, the President can modify the constitutional distribution

of revenues between the centre and the states. This means that

the president can either reduce or cancel the transfer of finances

from Centre to the states. Such modification continues till the end

of the financial year in which the Emergency ceases to operate.

Also, every such order of the President has to be laid before both

the Houses of Parliament.

Effect on the Life of the Lok Sabha and State Assembly

While a proclamation of National Emergency is in operation, the

life of the Lok Sabha may be extended beyond its normal term

(five years) by a law of Parliament for one year at a time (for any

length of time). However, this extension cannot continue beyond a

period of six months after the emergency has ceased to operate.

For example, the term of the Fifth Lok Sabha (1971–1977) was

extended two times by one year at a time5 .

Similarly, the Parliament may extend the normal tenure of a

state legislative assembly (five years) by one year each time (for

any length of time) during a national emergency, subject to a

maximum period of six months after the Emergency has ceased to

operate.

Effect on the Fundamental Rights

Articles 358 and 359 describe the effect of a National Emergency

on the Fundamental Rights. Article 358 deals with the suspension

of the Fundamental Rights guaranteed by Article 19, while Article

359 deals with the suspension of other Fundamental Rights

(except those guaranteed by Articles 20 and 21). These two

According to Article 358, when a proclamation of national

emergency is made, the six Fundamental Rights under Article 19

are automatically suspended. No separate order for their

suspension is required.

While a proclamation of national emergency is in operation, the

state is freed from the restrictions imposed by Article 19. In other

words, the state can make any law or can take any executive

action abridging or taking away the six Fundamental Rights

guaranteed by Article 19. Any such law or executive action cannot

be challenged on the ground that they are inconsistent with the six

Fundamental Rights guaranteed by Article 19. When the National

Emergency ceases to operate, Article 19 automatically revives

and comes into force. Any law made during Emergency, to the

extent of inconsistency with Article 19, ceases to have effect.

However, no remedy lies for anything done during the Emergency

even after the Emergency expires. This means that the legislative

and executive actions taken during the emergency cannot be

challenged even after the Emergency ceases to operate.

The 44th Amendment Act of 1978 restricted the scope of Article

358 in two ways. Firstly, the six Fundamental Rights under Article

19 can be suspended only when the National Emergency is

declared on the ground of war or external aggression and not on

the ground of armed rebellion. Secondly, only those laws which

are related with the Emergency are protected from being

challenged and not other laws. Also, the executive action taken

only under such a law is protected.

(b) Suspension of other Fundamental Rights

Article 359 authorises the president to suspend the right to move

any court for the enforcement of Fundamental Rights during a

National Emergency. This means that under Article 359, the

Fundamental Rights as such are not suspended, but only their

enforcement. The said rights are theoretically alive but the right to

seek remedy is suspended. The suspension of enforcement

relates to only those Fundamental Rights that are specified in the

Presidential Order. Further, the suspension could be for the period

during the operation of emergency or for a shorter period as

the whole or any part of the country. It should be laid before each

House of Parliament for approval.

While a Presidential Order is in force, the State can make any

law or can take any executive action abridging or taking away the

specified Fundamental Rights. Any such law or executive action

cannot be challenged on the ground that they are inconsistent

with the specified Fundamental Rights. When the Order ceases to

operate, any law so made, to the extent of inconsistency with the

specified Fundamental Rights, ceases to have effect. But no

remedy lies for anything done during the operation of the order

even after the order ceases to operate. This means that the

legislative and executive actions taken during the operation of the