In 2005, as Bihar saw a fractured mandate, the Union government recommended to the then president A P J Abdul Kalam that the Assembly be kept under suspended animation. However, even as (present chief minister) Nitish Kumar seemed to be getting numbers on his side, Governor Buta Singh recommended dissolution of the House on May 23, 2005. It was ratified by the Centre around midnight and Kalam, who was on an official visit to Moscow, signed the order.

The dissolution was questioned in the Supreme Court which came down heavily on the UPA government.

In addition to the court rap, the current political scenario in Karnataka too suited the UPA government to take the decision on keeping the Assembly in abeyance. After the none-too-impressive performance in the recent urban local bodies’ elections, the party was not too keen on facing Assembly polls. Said a Congress leader: “Keeping the House in abeyance gives us  breathing space. Since the Assembly is not dissolved, we need not have to face elections immediately. We can now be serious in strengthening the party with an eye on elections.”

The decision gives sufficient time for the Congress — also to other parties — to prepare for polls. Even if the House is dissolved after two months, the president will have another six months to hold elections which gives the Congress, say a total of eight months to get battle ready.

However, central to the government recommendation is the S R Bommai case in which the judgement was crystal clear.

The case between the former Karnataka chief minister versus the Centre, delivered by the Supreme Court on May 11, 1994, defined the use of Article 356 and imposition of President’s Rule. Bommai moved the court after the then Congress government at the Centre dismissed his ministry in 1989.

Landmark judgement
In that landmark judgement, the apex court held that a state government could be dismissed only under extenuating circumstances and laid down guidelines for such a dismissal.

The Bommai judgement referred to the suspended animation issue too. The court was not for the Centre to summarily dissolve the House and instead, allowed it to be suspended only for some time so that the possibility of forming a viable representative government was kept alive.

Keeping the Assembly in suspended animation, as a direct fallout of the Bommai judgement, has come to be applied in a few states. In addition to Bihar, in early 2002, as no party or combination formed government in Uttar Pradesh, the Assembly was kept in abeyance. It was revived after the Mayawati-BJP combine formed government in May that year.

In 2005, the Goa Assembly was kept in abeyance as the BJP’s Mohar Parikkar lost his majority. It was revived after the Congress-NCP claimed majority following their victory in four of the five byelections.