President is not King: Key points from HC verdict on Uttarakhand

April 22, 2016

New Delhi, Apr 22: The Uttarakhand High Court on Thursday quashed the President’s rule on Thursday, restoring Congress leader Harish Rawat as the chief minister, nearly a month after he was ousted.

President

The court came down heavily on the central government for its March 27 move to dismiss Rawat under the much-contested article 356 that empowers the union cabinet to impose President’s Rule in a state.

The case “brings to the fore a situation where 356 has been used contrary to the law”, said the bench of Chief Justice K.M. Joseph and Justice VK Bist, adding the article should only be used as a last resort.

“The proclamation of March 27 stands quashed,” said the court in the “status quo ante” order, meaning the previously existing state of affairs was being restored.

Here is what the court said during consecutive hearing since Monday.

-The Governor is not an agent of the central government

-It is the first time in the history of India that a double whammy was being committed under article 356 of hitting the authority of the Governor and the speaker

-In no circumstances can a solitary instance be material enough for imposing article 356.

-There have been instances of thick skinned governments in India lingering on. Besides the option of president rule, is the floor test not the best option to check whether they enjoy majority or not.

-If corruption was to be taken into account, hardly any government would be able to complete its 5 year term in India

-It was said that speaker had taken partisan attitude in case of Arya .It was completely non existential. We are shocked that in a matter which engages the council and the court was a blatant falsehood.

-”Sitting in Delhi, the union cabinet and President cannot rely on anything else than the Governor’s report. What is there in Governor’s report that is speaking of urgency of imposing President rule”.

-”There is no absolutism, President is not King. The President can be an excellent person but he can be terribly wrong, judges can also be terribly wrong”.

Crisis peaked on March 18

The crisis peaked on March 18 when the assembly passed the budget Appropriation Bill by voice vote even as the opposition, including the rebel Congress members, sought recorded voting. But Speaker Govind Kunjwal declined the request, leading the BJP to cry foul.

Rawat was then asked by Governor K.K. Paul to prove his majority on March 28. Just a day before, the central government ousted the Rawat-led government by imposing President’s Rule. Rawat immediately went to court.

On Thursday, Rawat said the ruling to restore his government had begun a “new phase” in the state and asked the Modi government to honour its stated policy of “cooperative federalism”.

Who said what on the HC verdict

The BJP claimed the court ruling was not a surprise.

Its general secretary and Uttarakhand affairs in charge Kailash Vijayvargiya, who played a key role in the developments leading to Rawat’s ouster, insisted that Rawat won’t be able to prove his majority.

“We will prove on April 29 that (the Rawat government) was and is in minority,” he said in New Delhi.

After ouster of Rawat, Vijayvargiya had claimed that Congress-led governments in Himachal Pradesh and Manipur were on their way out -- like it happened earlier in Arunachal Pradesh.

But another senior BJP leader, Subramanian Swamy, slammed Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi and Solicitor General Ranjit Kumar for the fiasco.

“Time to get a new AG and SG for the BJP government... We can win the Uttarakhand case,” Swamy tweeted.

At the end of hectic parleys between top BJP leaders including BJP chief Amit Shah and union ministers Arun Jaitley and Rajnath Singh in the capital, the government decided to move the Supreme Court to challenge the ruling of two-member bench of the High Court.

“We will move the Supreme Court tomorrow at 10.30 am and urge the court to hear the matter urgently,” Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi said.

An overjoyed Congress called the court ruling a victory for democracy and the judicial system “to whom alone aggrieved citizens can turn for relief”.

“The imposition of President’s Rule was unconstitutional,” spokesman Abishek Singhvi said in New Delhi.

Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal said the court verdict was “a huge embarrassment to the Modi government”.

“Till now the Modi government used to declare our orders null and void. Today, the high court has declared their order null and void.”

Experts were divided on the verdict’s implications

Former Rajya Sabha MP and noted columnist Kuldip Nayyar said that the “decision is welcome and it will strengthen democratic institutions and constitutional propriety. The ruling makes it clear that Harish Rawat was wrongly removed as chief minister. His position as the leader of the house and the chief minister has been restored now”.

On the other hand, there were others, who disagreed on Rawat’s current status “pending revocation” of the President’s Rule by the governor or the president, and said the court has “recommendation powers” and the executive can abide by it or has the liberty to challenge it in a higher court.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
July 20,2020

Mumbai, Jul 20: The Bombay High Court on Monday asked the NIA and the Maharashtra government to inform it about the health condition of poet Varavara Rao, an accused in the Elgar Parishad-Maoists links case, and if his family could be allowed to see him "from a reasonable distance".

The directions came after Rao's lawyer told the court that the activist was "almost on his deathbed".

Rao, 81, is currently admitted in the Nanavati Hospital here. He tested positive for coronavirus earlier this month and is also suffering from several other ailments.

A division bench of Justices S S Shinde and S P Tavade asked the National Investigation Agency (NIA) and the state to inform the court about Rao's health condition and clarify by July 22 whether his family members could be permitted to see him.

Rao's lawyer Sudeep Pasbola told the court that the activist was "almost on his deathbed" and that if he were to die, it should be in the presence of his family.

"His condition is very serious. He hit his head against the hospital bed while he was at the J J hospital and sustained severe injuries. Besides COVID-19, he suffers from several ailments, he is hallucinating and is delirious," Pasbola said.

"His days are numbered and if he is to die, at least let him die in the presence of his family members," the lawyer said while seeking that Rao be granted bail. Pasbola said Rao was in no condition to cause any prejudice to the probe in the case and even the NIA could not dispute this fact.

The bench, however, asked if Rao was in such a critical condition, wouldn't it be counterproductive to move him out of the hospital, and take him to any other place? "Also, if he has COVID-19, then how can he meet his family?" the court asked.

To this, Pasbola said if permitted, Rao's family could take precautions, and see him from a distance. The state's counsel, Deepak Thakare, told the high court that it could arrange for video-conferencing facilities for Rao's family.

Additional Solicitor General Anil Singh, who appeared for the NIA, said as far as he knew, "COVID-19 patients could not be permitted to meet anyone". He also said Rao had been admitted to "one of the best multi-speciality hospitals in the city," and that he was being taken care of in accordance with guidelines of the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR).

"We are providing the best treatment to him, all his medical needs are being attended to and we are following ICMR guidelines in treating him for COVID-19," Singh said. The court, while seeking details from the NIA and the state, said, "Can his family members see him from a reasonable distance in the hospital?"

Rao earlier filed two pleas in HC through his lawyer. One was to direct the state to produce all his medical reports from the state-run J J Hospital, where he was admitted in May but discharged hurriedly on June 2 and sent back to Taloja jail in neighbouring Navi Mumbai.

The other plea sought bail on health grounds.

The same bench also heard a petition filed by Rao's co-accused in the case, activists Vernon Gonsalves and Anand Teltumbde, seeking that they be tested for COVID-19 as they had been in close contact with Rao in the jail.

The court directed the prison authorities and the NIA to respond to the plea by July 23. "The prayer in the petition is limited. You (authorities) carry out the test for COVID-19 and see. If they are negative then good," the court said.

It noted that they (Gonsalves and Teltumbde) are lodged in the Taloja jail where there have been cases of inmates testing positive for coronavirus. Besides, the hearing on the plea of activist Sudha Bharadwaj, also an accused in the case, seeking bail on health grounds was adjourned after the court found the Byculla women prison superintendent's report on her health to be "illegible".

Her plea will also be heard on July 23.

Bharadwaj has been in jail since September 2018. She applied for bail on health grounds after an inmate at the Byculla prison tested positive for coronavirus last month.

Rao and nine other activists were arrested in the Elgar Parishad-Maoist links case, which was initially probed by the Pune Police and later transferred to the NIA.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
January 21,2020

New Delhi, Jan 21: With the IMF lowering India's economic growth estimate for the current fiscal to 4.8 per cent, senior Congress leader P Chidambaram on Tuesday claimed an attack on the world body and its chief economist Gita Gopinath by government ministers was imminent.

He also alleged that the growth figure of 4.8 per cent given by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) is after some "window dressing" and he won't be surprised if it goes even lower.

"Reality check from IMF. Growth in 2019-20 will be BELOW 5 per cent at 4.8 per cent," Chidambaram said in a series of tweets.

"Even the 4.8 per cent is after some window dressing. I will not be surprised if it goes even lower," the former finance minister said.

IMF Chief Economist Gopinath was one of the first to denounce demonetisation, he noted.

"I suppose we must prepare ourselves for an attack by government ministers on the IMF and Dr Gita Gopinath," Chidambaram said.

The IMF lowered India's economic growth estimate for the current fiscal to 4.8 per cent and listed the country's much lower-than-expected GDP numbers as the single biggest drag on its global growth forecast for two years.

In October, the IMF had pegged India economic growth at 6.1 per cent for 2019.

Listing decline in rural demand growth and an overall credit sluggishness for lowering of India forecasts, Gopinath, however, had said the growth momentum should improve next year due to factors like positive impact of corporate tax rate reduction.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
May 9,2020

New Delhi, May 9: The Trinamool Congress on Saturday responded to Union home minister Amit Shah’s charge that the Mamata Banerjee-led West Bengal government is not facilitating the movement of stranded migrant workers.

Amit Shah has written to West Bengal chief minister Mamata Banerjee, saying her government is doing “injustice” to migrant workers by not allowing the special Shramik trains to reach the state.

“Union home minister Amit Shah speaks after weeks of silence only to mislead people with lies,” the TMC’s Abhishek Banerjee was quoted as saying by news agency PTI.

“The Centre is lying… West Bengal is running 711 camps for migrants in the state. We are taking good care of them,” Abhishek Banerjee, who is also the chief minister’s nephew, said.

Amit Shah had pointed out in his letter that the Centre was not receiving the “expected support” from the state government in helping stranded migrant workers from West Bengal.

“West Bengal government is not allowing trains with migrants reaching the state. This is injustice with WB migrant labourers. This will create further hardship for them,” Amit Shah had said in his letter to Mamata Banerjee.

The issue of migrant workers is the latest flashpoint between the Centre and the West Bengal government amid a row over the state’s efforts to control the coronavirus disease (Covid-19).

The Centre and the state have exchanged allegations over the criteria for reporting deaths from the infection, and while While Bengal says the Centre is trying to politicise a public health crisis, the Union government maintains that state officials are ignoring repeated warnings to step up the fight against the disease.

Federal officials have said that the region has not conducted adequate tests and that there has been mismanagement over identifying hotspots and containing them.

Union home secretary Ajay Bhalla also slammed the state government for a very low rate of testing and high rate of mortality, 13.2%, by far the highest for any state.

The Centre has also accused the state government of not allowing cross-border movement of goods trucks to Bangladesh.

There are 1,678 Covid-19 cases and 160 deaths in West Bengal until Saturday morning.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.