Tag: #sachinpilot

Supreme Court firmed for ‘The voice of dissent’

Rebel congress MLAs Sachin Pilot and 18 others voices get heard by the Supreme Court of India. The apex court sternly said that in democracy a voice of dissent cannot be suppressed.The court also allowed the Rajasthan High Court to go ahead and pronounce it’s ruling on the 19 MLAs’ petition, but said that, the verdict will remain subject to the final order of the SC.

The “Lakshman rekha”

A three-judge bench of Justices Arun Mishra, BR Gavai and Krishna Murari, was hearing the special leave petition filed by the assembly speaker CP Joshi. The SLP is against the interim order of the High court on a plea of 19 rebel MLAs. The Top Court said, ‘‘it is the matter of just one day. Why can’t you wait?’’ The Court also questioned, ‘‘why the Speaker, a neutral person, should approach the court at all.’’

Representing the Rajasthan Speaker, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal argued that, it is the top court’s duty to ensure that all constitutional authorities act within the “Lakshman rekha” drawn for each one of them.

Responding to his argument Justice Arun Mishra asked, “Assume a leader has lost the faith of persons. While remaining in party they cannot be disqualified. Then this will become a tool and no one can raise their voice. Can a person elected by people not express his dissent? Voice of dissent cannot be suppressed. In a democracy, can somebody be shut down like this?”

Judiciary vs. Legislative

Quoting the famous Kihoto Hollohan case in 1992, Kapil Sibal said that, speaker had sent the notice to the dissident MLAs to give them a chance to explain their action as to why there are holed up in a hotel? And if the speaker will satisfy with their explanation, he will not disqualify them. But no judicial authority can interfere till the speaker make his final decision in the disqualification proceedings.

Mr. Sibal also listed the reasons for starting the disqualification proceedings, against Sachin Pilot and 18 others. He said that these19 MLAs did not attend party meetings and conspired to destabilise their own government in the state.The bench said that, ‘‘this is not a simple matter and these MLAs are elected representatives.’’

It should be noted here that, Speaker CP Joshi has filed the SLP, alleging that the high court cannot interdict the disqualification proceedings undertaken by him under 10th schedule of the Constitution. The Bench of the apex court said that the plea of the speaker raises important questions and requires prolonged hearing. The top court has fixed July 27, the date for the hearing. The top court will consider the question of whether courts can interfere with the disqualification proceedings initiated by the speaker at an interim stage before the speaker takes a decision on the disqualification plea.

Rajasthan Crisis on the door of SC

Rajasthan Political crisis has knocked the door of Supreme Court. Speaker of the state assembly, CP Joshi has filed the Special Leave Petition to the Apex court challenging the High Court order. The SC is likely to hear the matter on 23rd july.

Judiciary vs. Legislature

Former Deputy Chief Minister of state, Sachin Pilot and eighteen other rebel congress MLAs were served disqualification notices by the state assembly to the dissidents for “anti-party activities” last week. Against this notice Pilot and his supporter MLAs approached the High Court. On July 21st the HC granted some relief and had requested to the Speaker to extend the period given to the Pilot and his camp to reply the notice till the evening of July 24.

Differing to the decision of the High Court, Speaker C.P Joshi called a press conference and showed his displeasure against the HC order. Joshi said, “There should be no conflict between the judiciary and the legislature. The role of everyone in the parliamentary system is well defined. The Supreme Court gave instructions in 1992 to stop Aya Ram Gaya Ram culture, in which the Speaker has the right to disqualify members for defection. No one has the right to interfere in the process.”

He also said that, “In 1992, the constitutional bench of the Supreme Court made it clear that under the anti-defection law, the speaker has the right on the issue of disqualification. No one can interfere in the Speaker’s decision,” adding further he said, ‘‘whatever judgment the court has given, I have respected till now. However, does this respect and acceptance mean that one authority overlaps the role of the other?”

Drama in the SC

After filing of Special Leave Petition by the Speaker, Pilot camp has also filed a caveat in the SC, asking to be heard before the court takes a decision on the Speaker’s request.The apex court will hear the matter on July 23rd.  Congress leader and Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal will represent the Speaker in this case. From Pilot’s camp Mukul Rohatgi, will be their lawyer.

What is Special Leave Petition?

Special Leave Petitions or SLP is filed in the Supreme Court only when any substantial question of law is involved or gross injustice has been done. This is a “residual power” given to the Supreme Court by the Constitution of India under article 136.

It provides the aggrieved party a special permission to be heard in Apex court. It can be appealed against any judgment or order of any Court or tribunal in the territory of India, except the military court.

SLP is not a right to the aggrieved party but the Supreme Court has privilege to grant special leave. The SC may also refuse to grant the leave to appeal by exercising its discretion.

The Law of Defection

Merely just four months have passed and congress once again in the brink of “losing” one more state after “winning” the election.

First, Jyotiraditya Scindia in Madhya Pradesh and Now Sachin Pilot in Rajasthan. The oldest political party of country is facing a severe crisis as never been seen before. After the disagreement on various issues Sachin Pilot has openly come against the party leadership in Rajasthan. Congress’s top brass is trying to amend things but also sternly stated that if Pilot and his supporters will revolt against the party or try to topple the government in state with the help of BJP, they will have to face the disciplinary action.

The Anti defection law

There was a time in Indian politics when a “netaji” from haryana MLA Gaya Lal changed his party not once or twice but thrice in a single day. After that the phrase “aaya raam, gaya raam” became popular in political circuit. The trend to leave a party and join a new or again leave that, had become a trend. Several parties in India continued to be involved in this type of political horse-trading to grab the power.

To end this trend, an anti defection law was passed in 1985. The law was inserted by the 52nd constitutional amendment Act in the Tenth Schedule. It lays down the process by which legislators may be disqualified on grounds of defection by the presiding officer/Speaker of a legislature based on a petition by any other member of the house. The law applies to both Parliament and state assemblies.

Important Features of the law

• A legislator is deemed to have defected if he either voluntarily gives up the membership of his party or disobeys the directives of the party leadership on a vote. This rule implies on them too who abstain from the voting or vote against the party whip on any issue.  

•A person shall be disqualified for being a member of either House of Parliament if he is so disqualified under the Tenth Schedule.

• A person shall be disqualified for being a member of the Legislative Assembly or Legislative Council of a State if he is so disqualified under the Tenth Schedule.

Exception under the law

The law allows a party to merge with into another party, but at least two-thirds of its legislators are in favour of the merger.

If a new political party is created by the elected members of one party.

Those members of the party who haven’t accepted the merger between the two parties and opted to perform as a separate group from the time of such a merger.
In such a scenario, neither the members who decide to merge, nor the ones who stay with the original party will face disqualification.

This law has certainly  been able to curb the defection to a great extent. But In recent years what happened in Goa, Karnataka & MP are some fresh examples of the loopholes of this law. This shows that the law needs a relook in order to plug these loopholes. Though one cannot deny that this law has served as one of the most important legislation  Indian Parliament has enacted.