Breaking: SC restores Congress Government in Arunachal Pradesh [Read Judgment]

In one of the biggest blow to the Modi government, the Supreme Court today restored the Congress-led Nabam Tuki government.This was after the court termed as “illegal” and “violative of constitutional provisions” Governor J P Rajkhowa’s advancement of the Assembly session from its scheduled date of January 14, 2016 to December 16, 2015 in order to remove Speaker Nebam Rebia that had triggered the entire political crisis leading to the imposition of President’s Rule on January 26.A five-judge constitution bench comprising justices J.S. Khehar, Dipak Misra, Madan B. Lokur, P.C. Ghose and N.V. Ramana which ordered “status quo ante as on December 15, 2015” ruled that all the actions of the Governor was violative of article 163 of the Constitution.Citing the S R Bommai Vs Union of India case ruling on the scope of judicial review of a decision taken by the President or the Governor, the bench said it had “all the powers to put the clock back”.The judgment effectively meant that government formed by rebel congress leader Kalikho Pul with the help of BJP MLAs has been shown the door. Just before the Apex court had reserved its verdict on February 20, Pul was sworn in as the Ninth Chief Minister of Arunachal Pradesh with the support of 18 dissident Congress MLAs and two independents and 11 BJP MLAs who gave outside support.Congress party, which had 47 MLAs seats in the 60-member assembly, suffered a jolt when 21 of its lawmakers rebelled in January 2016. Eleven BJP MLAs backed the rebels in the bid to upstage the government. Later, 14 rebel Congress MLAs were disqualified.Passing orders after examination of constitutional schemes on the scope of discretionary powers of the Governor, the bench ruled that the Governor does not have power to call assembly session without the aid and advice of chief minister and his council of ministers.This is a double blow for Modi government as is it comes exactly two months after Harish Rawat-led Congress government made a come back in Uttarakhand after the President’s rule imposed there was quashed by state High Court after a floor test was facilitated by the Supreme Court.The five-judge constitution bench was passing orders after examination of constitutional schemes on the scope of discretionary powers of the Governor. The bench was essentially looking into constitutionality of State Governor J.P. Rajkhowa's move to advance the Arunachal Assembly session, which eventually triggered a political crisis leading to the ouster of the Congress-led Nabam Tuki government and proclamation of President’s rule in the State on January 26, 2016.The Supreme Court was delivering its verdict on an appeal against the January 14, 2016 Gauhati High Court order that upheld the discretionary powers of Rajkhowa to summon or advance a sitting of the Arunachal Pradesh assembly. Former state assembly speaker Nabam Rebia had moved the apex court after the Itanagar bench of the high court decided to uphold the actions of Rajkhowa.The Governor, on 9 December, advanced the date of the assembly session by a month to 16 December during which Rebia was impeached through a resolution passed by 33 legislators, including 20 rebel Congress members. Earlier on December 17, On December 17, a Gauhati High Court bench of Justice Hrishikesh Roy had stayed all the decisions of the Governor, observing that prima facie it was in violation of Art 174 and 175 of the Constitution dealing with convening of the session by the Governor and his message to the House.SCATHING ATTACKThe tone and tenor of today’s verdict was perfectly in sync with the scathing remarks the bench made against the centre and governor during exhaustive hearing which lasted for over a month during which it had even pointed out that “Arunachal experiment to topple state governments may prove deadly” and the court had the power to “put the clock back”Slamming the Governor for his decision to advance the assembly session, it had asked “What would be the change or the difference if the assembly proceedings would have taken place on pre-scheduled January 14 instead of December 16. There has to be some object to be achieved by the Governor by wanting to advance the date. Does it mean that whenever he feels bored, he can call the assembly to feel the excitement?"On Governor’s argument that his decisions are not open to judicial review, the court had said it “cannot be a mute spectator when democratic processes are slaughtered. “If democracy is slaughtered, how can the court remain silent,” Justice Khehar, the most vocal of all judges in the bench, had asked.The court had asked if the governor’s decision was backed by sound constitutional principles or based on a mere whim ? “You can use constitutional discretion only if it is based on and only on a constitutional principle… What was the constitutional principle here? Does advancing the Assembly session come under your discretionary powers?”It had heard arguments on the contours of the power and discretion of ...

Breaking: SC restores Congress Government in Arunachal Pradesh [Read Judgment]

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

Tags