SC raps former UP Assembly Guv for failing to abide by law

New Delhi, Feb 17 (UNI) The Supreme Court has held that the former speaker of the Uttar Pradesh Assembly had failed to exercise the powers conferred on him by the paragraph 6 of the 10th schedule of the Constitution by not deciding the issue of disqualification of MLAs belonging to the BSP breakaway group in August 2003.

A Constitution Bench, headed by Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan, also criticised then Speaker Kesri Nath Tripathi, a BJP MLA who proceeded to accept the case of a split based merely on a claim on their behalf.

The court also said, '' It has to be held that the Speaker committed an error that goes to the matter or an error that is so fundamental that even under a limited judicial review, the order of the speaker has to be interfered with.'' Thus approving of the majority decision of the High Court to remand the matter back to the Speaker, the apex court observed, '' The question then is whether it was necessary for the majority of the Division Bench of the High Court to remand the proceedings to the Speaker or a decision could have been taken whether the 13 members stand disqualified or not and if they are found to be disqualified, the balance 24 of the 37 MLAs would also stand disqualified, since in that case there will be no one-third of the legislature party forming a separate group as claimed by them.'' The total strength of the BSP in the Assembly was 109 when the chief minister of the state recommended dissolution of the assembly to the Governor, paving the way for fresh assembly elections in the state.

The recommendation of then chief minister Mayawati was rejected.

Justice P K Balasubramanium in a 69-page verdict writing for the Constitution Bench also noted, '' We think that as a court is bound to protect the constitution and its values and the principles of democracy, which is a basic feature of the constitution, this court has to take a decision one way or the other.'' The Court also held that the relevant date for determining disqualification of an elected representative of the people is the date on which the membership of the parent political party is voluntarily given up by the member concerned and not the date of the decision of the Speaker on the question of disqualification.

The three-judge bench of this court in the Jagbir Singh case requested Parliament to consider whether the power of deciding the issue of disqualification should be given to the Election Commission instead of the Speaker concerned in view of increasing incidents of impartiality of the Speaker coming under a cloud.

Three other judges on the Constitution Bench were Justices H K Sema, A R Laxmanan and D K Jain.

UNI