U’khand HC Un­happy with Rawat’s Re­marks HC records dis­plea­sure over chief min­is­ter’s ‘con­tra­dic­tory’ state­ments

The Economic Times - - Pure Politics - Raghav.Ohri@ times­group.com

New Delhi: While the Ut­tarak­hand High Cour t lam­basted the Cen­tral gov­ern­ment for im­pos­ing Pres­i­dent Rule in the State, it has also recorded its dis­plea­sure over a state­ment made by Ut­tarak­hand Chief Min­is­ter Har­ish Rawat that runs in “con­tra­dic­tion” to the pro­ceed­ings of the State Assem­bly.

Rawat, the pe­ti­tioner be­fore the High Court, in his plead­ings claimed (be­fore the Court) that a de­mand f or divi­sion of votes was made by the BJP MLAs only af­ter the Ap­pro­pri­a­tion Bill was passed by the Speaker. How­ever, on pe­rusal of the pro­ceed­ings of the Assem­bly, the divi­sion bench has ob­served “we can­not help r efer­ring to it (pr oceed­ings) when it says tha t the Speak er says tha t Ajay Bhatt, the Leader ofthe Op­po­si­tion made a de­mand in writ­ing f or di vi­sion. T here­after, what is stated in Hindi is that the Bill was passed”.

The 100-paged judg ement fur ther reads “we do no­tice that there is a con­tra­dic­tion in the plead­ings of the pe­ti­tioner and the doc­u­ment pr oduced. Ac­cor ding to the pe­ti­tioner, as we have al­ready no­ticed, af­ter pas­sage of the Bill, the de­mand was made . We are tr ou­bled b y this con­duct of the pe­ti­tioner in mak­ing this state­ment”.

The Court also dis­missed a g round raised b y At­tor ney Gen­eral Mukul Ro­hatgi wherein he re­lied on a let­ter writ­ten by se­nior BJP lead­ers to the Pr es­i­dent of In­dia in sup­port of the dis­si­dent MLAs.

Ob­serv­ing tha t the let­ter can­not be taken at its face value, the Bench has held “it would, if it has been taken into con­sid­er­a­tion, be en­tirely ex­tra­ne­ous and ir rel­e­vant, as the im­po­si­tion of Pres­i­dent’s Rule would ob­vi­ously to be the ad­van­tage of the BJP”. Minc­ing no w ords, the Court has ruled that “it is quite clear that the said par ty had a dir ect in­ter­est in see­ing tha t Pres­i­dent’s Rule is im­posed”.

The Benc h has also raised ey ebrows on the haste sho wn by the Cabi­net in im­po­si­tion of Pres­i­dent’s rule in Ut­tarak­hand.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from India

© PressReader. All rights reserved.