In a significant development, the Supreme Court has queried six disqualified Congress legislators from Himachal Pradesh on why they directly approached the apex court without first seeking relief from the high court, citing a potential violation of their fundamental rights.
The bench, headed by Justice Sanjiv Khanna and comprising Justices Dipankar Datta and PK Mishra, directed the lawmakers to provide grounds for their petition bypassing the high court. Senior advocates Satya Pal Jain and Abhinav Mukherjee represented the legislators during the proceedings.
The six rebel Congress lawmakers faced disqualification by the assembly speaker on February 29 for defying the Congress whip during the vote on the finance bill. Their dissent not only cost the party a Rajya Sabha seat but also cast a shadow over the future of Chief Minister Sukhwinder Singh Sukhu.
The disqualified MLAs, namely Chaitanya Sharma, Davinder Kumar Bhutto, Inder Dutt Lakhanpal, Rajinder Rana, Ravi Thakur, and Sudhir Sharma, contested the speaker’s order, asserting its illegality and violation of natural justice principles. They argued that the disqualification fell under para 2(1)(b) of the Tenth Schedule, relating to dissent within a party, rather than para 2(1)(a), which deals with changing party affiliation.
Their plea highlighted concerns over the speed of the disqualification process, with the notice served on February 28 and a verdict reserved by the speaker within 18 hours. Additionally, they criticized the lack of sufficient time provided for response and the absence of a copy of the disqualification petition during their preliminary hearing.
Representing the state government, chief whip, and the speaker, senior advocates Kapil Sibal, Abhishek Manu Singhvi, and Mukul Rohatgi appeared before the court. The caveat filed by advocate Varun K Chopra on behalf of the chief whip and state parliamentary affairs minister Harshvardhan Chauhan emphasized the Congress’s directive to all 40 MLAs to remain present in the assembly till February 29.
The Supreme Court adjourned the case for further hearing on March 18, signaling a continued legal battle between the disqualified MLAs and the state machinery. As the dispute unfolds, the intricacies of constitutional law and political maneuvering take center stage in Himachal Pradesh’s legislative landscape.
Sources By Agencies