Jaya Bachchan moves SC

New Delhi, Mar 10 (UNI) Samajwadi Party member of the Rajya Sabha Jaya Bachchan, facing disqualification as an MP, today moved an application in the Supreme Court, urging it to define the term 'office of profit'.

Mrs Bachchan has filed the application in a disposed of matter in which the apex court had dealt with the controversy on the meaning of office of profit.

Mrs Bachchan is the chairperson of the Uttar Pardesh Film Development Council, besides being a member of the Rajya Sabha.

The ELECTION Commission has recommended to the President of India to disqualify her as an MP. The Presidential assent is still awaited.

Meanwhile, the EC has also issued notice to Samajwadi Party General Secretary Amar Singh, who is the Chairman of UP Land Development Council and a member of the Rajya Sabha on a complaint that he was holding an office of profit. He has been directed to respond by March 31, 2006.

The applicant has also pleaded that many pronouncements of this court on the issue regarding the definition of the term of 'office of profit' are not clear and she has also pleaded that provisions of article 102(1) (a) of the Constitution are not attracted in her case as she was not drawing any salary from the state of UP. The post Jaya is holding is that of cabinet rank.

The applicant who has moved application for directions in Shibu Soren vs. Dayanand Sahay case has also alleged that the EC which had given an opinion to the President of India on March 6,2006 saying that the applicant had become subject to the disqualification under article 102 (1) (a)of the Constitution of India, has not provided her the copy of the opinion till date.

The application moved by her through her counsel Ezaj Maqbool also refers to the apex court five-judge constitution bench judgment in Maulana Abdul Shakur vs Rikhab Chand case where the Supreme Court has held that holding of an office of profit under any authority subject to the control of the government is not a disqualification prescribed for members of legislature.

The application also says that she had resigned as chairperson of the Uttar Pradesh Film Development Corporation (UPFDC) prior to her election as Rajya Sabha member in June 2004 but was later persuaded to accept the post.

The UP government has already passed a Bill declaring that the posts held by Jaya Bachchan and Amar Singh do not constitute an office of profit and the Act has been made effective with retrospective effect.

The applicant has also referred to the writ petition filed by defeated Congress candidate Madan Mohan challenging her election as Rajya Sabha member on the same ground which is still pending in the Allahabad high court.

The respondents in the application are the Centre, the Election Commission of India, the secretary to the President of India and Madan Mohan, the complainant before the EC.

In Shibu Soren case the apex court has laid down that three elements which are the sine qua non for attracting the provisions of article 102(1) (a) of the Constitution are that the person concerned must hold an office under the government of India or any state, the said office should be an 'office of profit' and also that the said office should be other than an office declared by Parliament by law not to disqualify its holder.

The Application is likely to be heard by the apex court after Holi holidays which come to an end on March 20.

UNI