Why in the News?

Recently, our constitutional courts have adopted the concept of “constitutional morality” to help interpret laws and decide if they are constitutionally valid.

What are the Origins of Constitutional Morality?

• The concept was first introduced by British historian George Grote in his book “A History of Greece,” where he discussed the reforms of the Athenian Constitution and emphasized the need for civic responsibility to prevent the usurpation of power. He described constitutional morality as a “paramount reverence for the forms of the Constitution”. Grote saw constitutional morality as a rare sentiment that includes freedom and self-restraint.
• In the Indian context, the term was popularized by Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, who stressed its importance in the Indian Constitution to ensure a peaceful and free democracy. Ambedkar recognized that constitutional morality was not a natural sentiment and needed to be established and promoted within the polity.

How Does Constitutional Morality Influence Judicial Interpretation and Governance?

• Guiding Judicial Decisions on Fundamental Rights: Constitutional morality serves as a guide for courts when interpreting and enforcing fundamental rights, especially in cases involving marginalized or vulnerable groups. It ensures that judicial decisions reflect constitutional principles such as equality, dignity, and justice.
  • Example: In the Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India (2018) case, the Supreme Court invoked constitutional morality to strike down Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, decriminalizing consensual same-sex relations.
• Balancing Tradition with Progressive Reforms: Constitutional morality allows the judiciary to balance traditional values with progressive reforms by focusing on the Constitution’s ideals rather than fluctuating public or political opinions.
  • Example: In the Sabarimala case (2018), the Supreme Court used the concept of constitutional morality to allow women of all ages to enter the Sabarimala temple.
• Ensuring Adherence to Constitutional Procedures: Constitutional morality stresses the importance of adhering to constitutional forms, rules, and procedures, ensuring that governance remains within the framework of law and order, and preventing arbitrary or undemocratic practices.
  • Example: Judicial scrutiny in matters of electoral integrity, like the K.K. Verma v. Union of India case (2009), where the Court reaffirmed that elections must be conducted with strict adherence to constitutional norms, avoiding arbitrary changes to electoral laws.
• Facilitating Judicial Oversight and Accountability: Constitutional morality encourages the judiciary to hold the executive and legislature accountable, ensuring they act in accordance with the Constitution. It allows courts to question and, if necessary, invalidate actions that undermine constitutional principles.
  • Example: The Keshavananda Bharti case (1973) upheld the “basic structure doctrine,” wherein the Supreme Court ruled that even constitutional amendments cannot alter the Constitution’s basic structure.

Is constitutional morality a safeguard against fluctuating societal trends in law?

• Bulwark Against Volatility: Constitutional morality ensures consistency in legal decisions, protecting fundamental rights and justice, regardless of changing societal trends.
  • Example: In the Navtej Singh Johar case, the Court used constitutional morality to uphold the dignity of the LGBTQ+ community, despite fluctuating public views on same-sex relations.
• Dangerous Weapon: Critics argue constitutional morality can be used to override public opinion or traditional values, leading to judicial overreach.
  • Example: In the Sabarimala case, the Court’s decision to allow women of all ages into the temple sparked controversy, with some claiming it ignored religious customs and societal norms.

Way forward: 

• Strengthening Civic Education: Promote widespread understanding of constitutional morality through educational reforms, ensuring citizens are well-informed about the Constitution’s values and their role in upholding them. This can lead to greater respect for constitutional norms and active participation in democratic processes.
• Judicial Vigilance and Reform: Ensure that the judiciary continues to use constitutional morality as a guiding principle in cases of constitutional interpretation, balancing traditional values with progressive reforms. This requires ongoing judicial training and a commitment to upholding the Constitution’s spirit, particularly in times of political or social upheaval.

Mains PYQ:

Q ‘Constitutional Morality’ is rooted in the Constitution itself and is founded on its essential facets. Explain the doctrine of ‘Constitutional Morality’ with the help of relevant judicial decisions.(UPSC IAS/2021)

Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024

Attend Now

Why in the News?

After Manipur CM N. Biren Singh resigned, President’s Rule was imposed on February 13 due to ethnic violence and the BJP’s failure to find a consensus CM candidate.

What are some previous instances of the imposition of President’s Rule?

• First Instance (1951 – Punjab): The first-ever imposition of President’s Rule was in Punjab (PEPSU state) in 1951 due to the collapse of the Gopi Chand Bhargava-led government.
• 1967 Political Crisis (Multiple States): After the Fourth General Elections, many states had unstable coalition governments. President’s Rule was imposed in states like West Bengal, Kerala, and Uttar Pradesh due to political instability.
• 1984 – Punjab (After Indira Gandhi’s Assassination): Following the assassination of Indira Gandhi, there were widespread riots and breakdown of law and order in Punjab. The state was placed under President’s Rule from 1983 to 1985 to handle the crisis.
• 1992 – Dismissal of BJP Governments (Post-Babri Masjid Demolition): After the demolition of Babri Masjid in December 1992, President’s Rule was imposed in Madhya Pradesh, Himachal Pradesh, Rajasthan, and Uttar Pradesh, where BJP-led governments were in power.
• 2016 – Uttarakhand & Arunachal Pradesh (Judicial Review Cases): President’s Rule was controversially imposed in Uttarakhand and Arunachal Pradesh due to political instability, but the Supreme Court later revoked it, citing unconstitutional use of Article 356.

Why has it become less frequent?

• Judicial Review & Bommai Judgment (1994) – The S.R. Bommai vs Union of India case allowed judicial review of President’s Rule, enabling courts to strike down unconstitutional proclamations, deterring its misuse.
  • Example: Arunachal Pradesh (2016) – President’s Rule was imposed, citing a breakdown of constitutional machinery. The Supreme Court overturned the decision, ruling that the Governor’s actions were unconstitutional and reinstating the Congress-led government.
• Stricter Conditions for Extension – After one year of President’s Rule, extensions require either a national emergency or the Election Commission’s certification that elections cannot be held, making prolonged Central rule difficult.
  • For example, The Supreme Court’s judgment in the S.R. Bommai vs Union of India (1994) case established stricter conditions for extending President’s Rule beyond one year.
• Political & Legal Accountability – Increased coalition politics and judicial interventions have made it harder for the Union government to arbitrarily impose President’s Rule, ensuring greater stability and democratic governance in States.
  • Example: Uttarakhand (2016) – The Congress-led government faced internal rebellion, leading to the imposition of the President’s Rule. The High Court and Supreme Court struck it down, restoring the elected government.

What does it mean to keep a legislature in suspended animation?

• Temporary Suspension Without Dissolution – Keeping the legislature in suspended animation means that the state assembly is temporarily inactive but not dissolved during President’s Rule. This allows the possibility of reinstating the assembly if political stability is restored.
  • Example: In Manipur (2025), the state assembly was kept in suspended animation after the imposition of President’s Rule, instead of being dissolved.
• Governor Takes Over Legislative Functions – The powers of the legislature are transferred to the Governor or the Union government during this period, effectively sidelining the elected representatives.
  • Example: In Arunachal Pradesh (2016), the assembly was suspended, and the Governor was entrusted with the state’s administrative powers after the imposition of President’s Rule.
• Potential for Revival – The assembly can be revived if conditions improve and a popular government can be formed, allowing the political process to resume once the President’s Rule is revoked.
  • Example: In Jammu and Kashmir (2018-2019), the state assembly remained in suspended animation after the imposition of President’s Rule, waiting for a stable political situation before elections could take place.

Way forward: 

• Strengthening Federal Governance – To prevent the misuse of President’s Rule, it is essential to promote a more robust system of checks and balances, ensuring that any imposition of President’s Rule is transparent and justified, with clear guidelines for intervention.
• Reform of Political Stability Mechanisms – Encouraging political parties to form more stable coalitions and ensuring timely elections through institutional mechanisms will reduce the need for prolonged central intervention, preserving the autonomy of states while maintaining national integrity.

Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024

Attend Now

Why in the News?

Over the past decade, the Aam Aadmi Party’s government in Delhi has been in a constant legal battle with the Centre over the city’s special constitutional status and how it should be governed.

What is the Constitutional status of Delhi? 

• Union Territory with Special Status – Delhi is a Union Territory (UT) but has a legislative assembly and council of ministers, unlike most other UTs. It is governed under Article 239 and Article 239AA of the Indian Constitution.
• Limited Legislative Powers – The Delhi Legislative Assembly can make laws on subjects in the State List and Concurrent List, except for police, public order, and land, which remain under the control of the Central Government (Article 239AA(3)(a)).
  • Three Power Centers – Governance in Delhi is divided among:
  • Chief Minister and Council of Ministers (elected government)
  • Lieutenant Governor (L-G) (appointed by the President)
  • Union Home Ministry (exercises control over law, order, and services).
• L-G’s Role and Discretionary Powers – While the L-G is bound by the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers, they can refer matters to the President in case of disagreements, giving the Centre overriding authority (Article 239AA(4)).
• Sui Generis (Unique) Model – The Supreme Court has ruled that Delhi’s governance model is neither like a full-fledged state nor like a regular Union Territory, making it a special case within India’s federal structure.

How does Delhi differ from other Union Territories and States?

What are the legal battles between Delhi and the central Government? 

• Control Over Bureaucracy (Services Department Dispute): The Centre transferred control of Delhi’s bureaucracy (services) to the Lieutenant Governor (L-G) through a 2015 notification. The Supreme Court (2023) ruled in favor of the Delhi government, giving it power over services except police, land, and public order. However, the Centre later amended the GNCTD Act (2023) to override this decision, restoring L-G’s power over services.
  • Example: The Delhi government’s attempt to appoint bureaucrats without L-G’s approval was blocked.
• Lieutenant Governor’s Special Powers (Interpretation of Article 239AA): The Centre argued that the L-G has overriding authority over all governance matters, while the Delhi government maintained that L-G must act on the aid and advice of the elected government. In 2018, the Supreme Court ruled that the L-G must follow the advice of the Delhi government, except in matters explicitly under the Centre’s control.
  • Example: The L-G blocked multiple decisions of the Delhi Cabinet, including the ‘Doorstep Ration Delivery’ scheme, citing procedural issues.
• Control Over Law and Order (Police and Land Disputes): Delhi’s elected government has no control over law and order (including Delhi Police and land administration), leading to governance challenges. The Supreme Court has repeatedly upheld Centre’s control over these subjects as per Article 239AA.
  • Example: The Delhi government sought control over Delhi Police after riots in 2020, but the Centre refused, citing law and order as a central subject.

What are the implications due to Governance Crisis and Political Fallout?

• Administrative Paralysis and Policy Delays: Frequent clashes between the Delhi government and the L-G have stalled decision-making, leading to delays in key projects and governance paralysis.
  • Example: The Mohalla Clinics initiative for public healthcare faced repeated delays due to bureaucratic approvals and interference by the L-G’s office.
• Reduced Accountability and Bureaucratic Resistance: With dual control over administration, bureaucrats often face conflicting orders from the elected government and the Centre, leading to inefficiency.
  • Example: The Delhi Jal Board’s water supply projects were disrupted as officers refused to follow the Delhi government’s directives, citing L-G’s authority.
• Political Tensions and Electoral Ramifications: The governance crisis has deepened political rivalries, with the Delhi government accusing the Centre of undermining democracy, while the Centre claims Delhi needs central oversight due to its national capital status.
  • Example: The arrest of CM Arvind Kejriwal and Deputy CM Manish Sisodia in the excise policy case led to political instability and weakened AAP’s governance.

What could happen after the election result in future?  

• Stronger Central Control and Policy Alignment: With the BJP in power in both the Centre and Delhi, governance could become more streamlined as there would be no friction over administrative control.
  • Example: The L-G’s role in decision-making would likely diminish in practice, as seen in BJP-ruled Puducherry, where Centre-state coordination improved after a BJP-backed government took over.
• Reversal of AAP’s Key Policies: The BJP might roll back or modify key AAP policies, such as free electricity, water subsidies, and education reforms, aligning governance with its national agenda.
  • Example: Similar to how the BJP government in Madhya Pradesh altered welfare schemes after replacing the Congress government, a BJP-led Delhi might review or discontinue AAP’s flagship initiatives.

Way forward: 

• Clearer Division of Powers – Amendments to Article 239AA or a judicial clarification can establish a more balanced framework, ensuring smooth governance without frequent conflicts between the Centre and the Delhi government.
• Strengthening Cooperative Federalism – A structured dialogue mechanism between the Centre, L-G, and the elected government can improve coordination.

Mains PYQ:

Q Discuss the essentials of the 69th Constitutional Amendment Act and anomalies, if any that have led to recent reported conflicts between the elected representatives and the institution of the Lieutenant Governor in the administration of Delhi. Do you think that this will give rise to a new trend in the functioning of the Indian federal politics? (UPSC IAS/2016)

Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024

Attend Now