Is it vendetta?

On 18 March,2016 the Government of Uttarakhand failed to pass the Appropriation Bill on the floor of the house. This meant that the state did not have a budget and the government of the day did not enjoy the majority. However, the Government claimed it had the numbers despite 9 members of the ruling party rebelling (also disqualified by the Speaker).

On 20 March, the Governor asks the CM to prove his majority in the house on 28th March 2016. This was followed by widespread allegations and sting operations that showed horse trading of MLAs. Do mere allegations and unsubstantiated videos amount to  "Constitutional Breakdown"? Honestly,I don't know.It is best left for the legal experts to decide. But the Central Government, in all its wisdom, thought it was a fit case to impose President's Rule. So an Emergency Cabinet Meeting was held on Saturday evening (26 March) and the next morning the President signed the proclamation under Article 356 of the Constitution of India.

The ruling party, challenged this decision of the Central Government in the Nainital High Court.The court asked the Government to prove its majority on the floor of the house on March 31; directing the speaker to not to disclose the voting results but to submit it to the court in a sealed cover. However, the court did not deem it fit to revoke President's Rule nor did it question its imposition.

What I find surprising is the Central Government deciding to challenge the High Court's decision.Also, the Central Government decided to prorogue both the houses of Parliament possibly to prevent opposition fire. But the series of steps taken by the Central Government makes me question, Is the Union Government doing this to avenge for Opposition's stalling of Parliament and blocking key reform legislation? Well, only time will tell.