SHORT ANSWER:
The Supreme Court rulings in the cases of "S.R. Bommai vs. Union of India" and "K.ihoto Hollohan vs. Zachilhu" set precedents for the exercise of discretionary powers by governors in hung assembly situations.
DETAILS:
- In "S.R. Bommai vs. Union of India" (1994), the Supreme Court laid down guidelines on the use of Article 356, emphasizing that the governor's discretion must be exercised in a constitutional manner.
- In "K.ihoto Hollohan vs. Zachilhu" (1992), the Court ruled that the governor's discretion should be limited and based on the advice of the council of ministers, unless there is a breakdown of constitutional machinery.
PUNISHMENT / IMPLICATIONS (if applicable):
- Misuse of discretionary powers by governors can lead to judicial review and potential invalidation of decisions.
SOURCE:
- Constitution of India, Supreme Court Judgments
Related Questions: