Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi told the apex court that the government has not been able to form an opinion on the subject and asked for two more days to come up with a decision.
The Attorney General on Wednesday informed the Supreme Court that the Centre is 'seriously considering' conducting floor test in Uttarakhand.
A bench comprising Justices Dipak Misra and Shiva Kirti Singh had on Tuesday repeated its suggestion that the Centre should consider holding a floor test in the Assembly under its supervision to ascertain the actual situation and apprise it about the same.
During the hearing on the Centre's appeal against Uttarakhand High Court verdict on imposition of President's rule in the state, Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi told the court, "Centre is seriously considering court's suggestion to hold floor test in the state. I have conveyed to Centre but has not received any instruction so far."
The court has deferred the hearing till Friday and asked Centre to apprise it about the feasibility of holding floor test.
Meanwhile, the court said that the hearing will commence on May 6 even if Attorney General doesn't apprise them about the Centre's stand on its suggestion. The court also said that it may consider sending the matter to Constitution bench on May 6.
The interim order putting stay on Uttarakhand High Court decision quashing President rule will remain in force till further orders.
An apex court bench headed by Justice Dipak Misra, had on April 27, directed to continue the President's rule for the while.
The two-judge division bench, comprising of Justice Dipak Mishra and Justice Shiva Kirti Singh, had also asked several questions to the Centre asking it to justify imposition of President's rule in the state.
Hearing the Centre's plea against the Uttarakhand High Court order, the apex court sought to know whether the Governor could have sent a message in the present manner under Article175 (2) to conduct a floor test and if delay in the floor test can be a ground for the proclamation of President's rule in the state.
The apex court has also sought to know whether disqualification of MLAs by the Uttarakhand Speaker is a relevant issue for the purpose of imposing President's rule under Article 356 and proceedings in the Uttarakhand assembly can be taken note of by the President for imposing his rule.
The apex court further asked the Centre as to what the stage is of the Appropriation Bill and when President's rule comes into the picture with regards to the Appropriation Bill.
The Centre had introduced President's rule on March 27.
(With agency inputs)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
 "Supreme Court")
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
)
)
)
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}