Consider the following statements regarding the President's rule in Rajasthan: 1. Article 356 of the Indian constitution deals with the imposition of President rule. 2. Two President's rules had been applied when Mohan Lal Sukhadia was the chief minister. 3. In Rajasthan, there have been three presidential rules imposed.  Which of the following statement is/are NOT correct?

Consider the following statements regarding the President's rule in Rajasthan: 1. Article 356 of the Indian constitution deals with the imposition of President rule. 2. Two President's rules had been applied when Mohan Lal Sukhadia was the chief minister. 3. In Rajasthan, there have been three presidential rules imposed.  Which of the following statement is/are NOT correct? Correct Answer 2 and 3 only

2 and 3 only is NOT correct.

  • President Rule:
    • It refers to the suspension of the state government machinery and the imposition of direct central rule in a state. 
    • Article 356 of the Indian constitution deals with the imposition of President rule.
    • Only one President's rule had been applied when Mohan Lal Sukhadia was the chief minister.
    • In Rajasthan, up till now, there have been four presidential rules imposed. Hence statement 2 and 3 is NOT correct.
    • The first Presidential rule was the shortest and the fourth Presidential rule was the longest.

Additional Information

President Rule Period  Important aspect
First President Rule 13-03-1967 to 26-04-1967 Shortest duration
Second President Rule 30-04-1977 to 21-06-1977 -
Third President Rule 17-02-1980 to 05-06-1980 -
Fourth Presidential Rule 15-12-1992 to 03-12-1993

Longest duration

Important Points

  • Chhattisgarh and Telangana are the only states in India where Presidential rule is not imposed so far.

Related Questions

Ram Lal & Co., a sole proprietary of Ram Lal, files a suit against 'X' for recovery of money. 'X' files a Counter Claim in the said suit for recovery of money owed by Shyam Lal & Co., a sole proprietary of Shyam Lal, son of Ram Lal:
In the question below, are given a statement followed by three courses of actions numbered I, II and III. On the basis of the information given, you have to assume everything in the statement to be true, and then decide which of the following suggested courses of actions logically follow(s) for pursuing. Statement: Soon VAT 69 whiskey and Smirnoff Vodka will not be found on the shelves of Delhi Liquor stores owing to the duplication of barcode by manufacturer United Limited. The Delhi government financial commissioner blacklisted the manufacturer. Financial commissioner Anindo Majumdar had said in an order dated September 14, that USL had violated provisions of the Delhi Excise Act, 2009 and Delhi Excise Rules, 2010 by using unauthorized and loose barcodes, which could be easily misused. Courses of action: I. The ban will force United Spirits Limited not to sell its liquor in the national capital for two years. II. the appellant violated provisions of the Delhi Excise Act, 2009, Delhi Excise Rules, 2010, the terms and conditions of the license issued to it and the standard operating procedure framed by the Delhi Excise Department and that consequently the department has rightly imposed the penalty of blacklisting under Rule 70 of the Delhi Excise Rules, 2010 upon United Spirits LTD (USL), Aurangabad. III. United Limited has been blacklisted by the Delhi government financial commissioner.