Back as CM Rawat chairs Uttarakhand cabinet meeting
IANS
The Supreme Court on Friday asked the central government to approach its secretary general for listing its petition challenging an Uttarakhand High Court order setting aside president’s rule in the state.
An apex court bench of Justice Dipak Misra and Justice S.K. Singh asked Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi to approach the court’s secretary general after he mentioned the central government’s plea challenging high court judgement.
The court said thereafter, Chief Justice T.S. Thakur will decide which bench will hear the matter.
It is likely that the central government’s plea may come up for hearing later in the day or on Monday.
In a major blow to the BJP-led central government, the Uttarakhand High Court on Thursday set aside president’s rule in the state, restoring Congress leader Harish Rawat as the chief minister, nearly a month after he was ousted.
Chief Minister Harish Rawat chaired a cabinet meeting late on Thursday. Official sources said the cabinet cleared at least 11 proposals pending before the government.
These included re-appointment of over 6,000 guest teachers on a monthly stipend of Rs.15,000, the sources said.
The cabinet, according to the sources, also recommended an assembly session to be convened on April 29 when Rawat is to face a floor test to prove his legislative majority in the 70-member house.
In a major blow to the BJP-led central government, the Uttarakhand High Court on Thursday set aside president’s rule in the state, restoring Congress leader Harish Rawat as the chief minister, nearly a month after he was ousted.
1 Comment
IN MY VERY HUMBLE OPINION, the supreme court has erred and mis directed it self, and lost track of it’s own course!
the high court of uttarkhand passed a judgment in it’s own wisdom.
unfortunately the learned judges of the high court failed to understand the historical implications of their judgment, and therefore the need to make a copy of the full text of the judgment made available to all the parties, in a few hours of pronouncing their judgement.
the attorney general has taken more than full advantage of this little soft spot in an otherwise judicially unimpeachable and highly enlightened judgment.
and this is the same attorney general, who unlike any before him, ran to the private house of the great president of the party in power, shri shri mahaa shri Amit shaw ji, along with the principle secretary to the prime minister of India , the home minister of India , the home secretary of india and the great finance minister of India, to take instructions on what to do before the supreme court on the unfavourable judgment of the high court!
where was the law minister, where was the prime minister of india, where were their offices, where was the seat of the government of India of the republic of India, he did not think!
and no one in politics, no one in the great Indian media of drama and non drama, no one in the judiciary, no one in the legal fraternity is asking any questions about the constitutional and judicial propriety of this great meeting held at the great private house of this great leader of the party in power!
hey ram! hey ram!
where are you great shri ram maharaj?!
the attorney general has been generally very bullish, and not like any of his predecessors in the Indian legal history, not just in this case, but in most politically sensitive matters that he has been appearing before the supreme court.
the supreme court then put the judgment of the high court in abeyance, so that the high court furnishes the copy of the judgment to all parties, and the parties can present their respective case before the supreme court.
the union of India has sought suspension of the judgment, pending a decision on their appeal to set aside that judgment.
it was for the union of India, once it has secured a copy of the judgment, to make out a case that the supreme court has to suspend the operation of the judgment. and if the supreme court in it’s wisdom saw the point of the union of India, they could have arrived at such a conclusion, and giving their reasons and reasoning, suspended the judgment, and went on to hear the case as soon as they might have felt advisable! and passed a final order on the appeal.
once that said, and done, the matter would have gone out of the purview of the supreme court and entered the arena of the people of India in the subsequent elections happening now elsewhere, in that state of utarkhand sooner or later, in the parliament when the proclamation is placed there!
the people of India would decide the future of India in their own wisdom.
but unfortunately, the supreme court did not do so.
it vacillated a lot.
it asked seven wonderful and extremely pertinent questions to the union of India through the attorney general.
from the reports we read, the learned attorney general did not answer any of the seven questions!
and the supreme court did not insist on the attorney general providing the answers.
that, is a great travesty of justice.
and that is a great tactic adopted by the union of India and the attorney general to sabotage the constitutional scheme,
and the unfortunately too soft and too polite supreme court in the face an attorney general and his clients, the union of India, who have been extremely belligerent in their submissions on many matters.
it was not the mandate of the supreme court to arbitrate between the different parties before it.
it had to hear and pronounce it’s wise judicious orders on an examination of the constitutional scheme touching upon this subject and decided upon clearly and unambiguously before, by the constitutional benches of the supreme court.
they present judges had more than enough light shining on their path.
the supreme court deprived the poor democracy starved people of India a great opportunity of having a great judicial ruling from the supreme court.
the constitution is much higher, and above petty union governments, petty attorney generals and great judges of the supreme court!
it is the only god, only parent and only protector of the people of India, when everyone else fails in their job.
if the supreme court was of a judicial opinion that the proclamation of the rule of the president was not warranted as per the constitutional mandate, it should have boldly said so. and the dismissed state government would have been restored temporarily, and based on any directive by the governor, the chief minister would have taken the floor test, as mandated by the constitution and federal scheme of it.
he would go home if he would loose and stay in power if he proved his majority.
but by not hearing the parties in this matter of great constitutional urgency and importance till the could say all they had to say, the court getting all the answers for the great and pertinent questions it has asked, and would ask more, by not exercising the judicial wisdom based on constitutional mandate to decide if there was a case for suspension of the judgment of high court, by not passing an expeditious final order upholding or rejecting the judgment of the high court, the supreme court appears to have erred deeply and greatly!
under the constitutional mandate, as decided by the supreme court before more than once, a state government, when directed by the governor, shall prove it’s majority in a floor test.
that was not allowed here and the union of India, according to a very learned and enlightened judgment of the high court exercised a power that it did not poses based on the material it had before it!
the supreme court should have decided, based on the well settled principles, if a suspension was warranted, and if warranted suspend and hear the matter, and if not warranted, allow the operation of the high court judgment and also hear the matter as expeditiously as it deemed fit.
now the union government and the political party that has formed that government have an extreme and unfair advantage over an unjustly dismissed state government.
with the kind of resources and authority the union government has been exercising in the last few weeks, it will, by hook or crook ensure that the floor test goes against the chief minister, not because he would not have had a majority on the 28 of April, or on any date the governor might have set for a floor test after letting the government resume it’s status, but because the union government has been conferred an unfair advantage.
this is something that the constitution has not mandated upon the supreme court.
supreme court ought not to hesitate to exercise it’s judicial wisdom and enlightenment.
even god can not be always right.
right or wrong, the supreme court should have given it’s clear decision, interim and /or final on the judgment of the high court.
unless everyone and every constitutional authority, every constitutional institution discharges it’s strict mandate in a strict manner without allowing any dilution or diversion, it would become difficult for the republic of India to protect it self from usurpers of power, from undemocratic elements that would use the constitution to come to power, only with a pre planned design to sabotage and destroy the very constitution.
we have come to the second such situation in the history of the republic of India.
the first situation was during the proclamation of internal emergency in India during 1975.
the supreme court then failed the constitution, the republic and the people of India!
by not proceeding to give it’s decision on the appeal of the union of India, by not giving a clear decision on the petition for suspension of the judgment of high court by union of India pending a final order, by letting the union of India get away with so many adjournments, by not insisting for answers for the great seven questions the supreme Court asked the union of India, by not drawing the appropriate inference that is normally drawn by all highest courts of any country in the world when it’s pertinent questions go unanswered, the most honourable supreme court of India did less justice to the people of India than it could have.
Judges are there to decide. your lordships may kindly decide what you think is right.
we the people of India, just like the people of any democracy, will receive your judgment as it is handed over to us.
and we will move forward taking advantage of your good decisions, and overcoming any bad decisions that may be in our fate, just as we were told by the supreme court during emergency in 1975/76, that we did not have the right to life in the face of an autocratic government.
we changed that government.
we strengthened our Constitution.
we strengthened our supreme court!
we will do it again, and again, and again, as many times as it is needed!
bhaarath maathaa ki jai!
satyameva jayathe!
dharmam saranam gacchhaami
sangham saranam gacchhaami!
jai hind
long live liberty, equality and fraternity!
long live democracy!
long live the constitution of India!