Prior to 2019, the constitution of the state of Jammu and Kashmir had a similar system of Governor's rule, under its Section 92.
The 44th Amendment Act of 1978 introduced a new provision to put a restraint on the power of Parliament to extend the President's rule in a state.
Until the mid-1990s, President's rule was often imposed in states through the abuse of authority of Governors who were in collusion with the Union government.
After the revocation and bifurcation, the reorganized Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir is subject to the section 73 of the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganization Act, 2019, which is used to impose President's rule as the Article 356 is not applicable to Union Territories.
If the President, on receipt of a report from the Lieutenant Governor of Union territory of Jammu and Kashmir, or otherwise, is satisfied,— (a) that a situation has arisen in which the administration of the Union territory of Jammu and Kashmir cannot be carried on in accordance with the provisions of this Act, or (b) that for the proper administration of Union territory of Jammu and Kashmir it is necessary or expedient so to do, the President may, by order, suspend the operation of all or any of the provisions of this Act for such period as he thinks fit and makes such incidental and consequential provisions as
may appear to him to be necessary or expedient for administering the Union territory of Jammu and Kashmir in accordance with the provisions of this Act.In NCT of Delhi, President's rule is applied on the basis of Article 239AB of the Constitution of India (as the Article 356 is not applicable to Union Territories) which reads thus: 239AB.
(b) that for the proper administration of the Union territory it is necessary or expedient so to do, the President may, by order, suspend the operation of all or any of the provisions of this Act for such period as he thinks fit and make such incidental and consequential provisions as may appear to him to be necessary or expedient for administering the Union territory in accordance with the provisions of article 239.Article 356 gives wide powers to the Union government to assert its authority over a state if civil unrest occurs and the state government does not have the means to end it.
Subsequent pronouncements by the Supreme Court in Jharkhand and other states have further limited the scope for misuse of Article 356.
[10] Article 356 has always been the focal point of a wider debate of the federal structure of government in Indian polity.
[11] The Sarkaria Commission Report on Centre-State Relations 1983 has recommended that Article 356 must be used "very sparingly, in extreme cases, as a measure of last resort, when all the other alternatives fail to prevent or rectify a breakdown of Constitutional machinery in the state".