New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday agreed to hear next week a writ petition seeking a CBI probe into the alleged horse trading of MLAs in Uttarakhand from March 18 to 27 when President’s rule was imposed in the State.
Advocate M.L. Sharma who filed this writ petition made a mention’ before a three-judge Bench of Chief Justice T.S. Thakur and Justices R. Banumathi and Uday Lalit for urgent listing and the Bench agreed to post it for hearing next week.
Read: Uttarakhand crisis: HC orders floor test on March 31, rebel MLAs to participate
In his writ petition Mr Sharma raised important questions of law, viz whether without complying with the Governor’s order for floor test on March 28, the Union Cabinet can recommend President’s rule under Article 356 of the Constitution; whether once the Governor fixed date for floor test, proclamation can be issued and will not amount to contempt of court in the Bommai judgment; Whether MLAs, who allegedly paid/accepted cash/kind for rebel MLAs in the House are liable to be prosecuted under the Prevention of Corruption Act? Whether or not it is a clear corruption in the public office by the public servant.
The petitioner pointed out that there is a clear case of extra-judicial confession by the BJP general secretary in charge of Uttarakhand, Mr Kailash Vijayvargiya who told media “We have 35 MLAs with me here (in New Delhi) and we have the support of Ganesh Joshi also”.
He said all the 9 rebel MLAs accepted chartered flight arranged by the BJP. He said the MLAs are not immune under Article 194(1) /105(2) of the Constitution for their criminal act in the Assembly. While seeking a CBI probe, the petitioner also prayed for quashing the President’s rule in the State.
Read: Centre cuts short Budget session in view of Uttarakhand political crisis
Meanwhile, Harish Rawat, who had challenged dismissal of his government, said on Tuesday that the High Court order for floor test was a “tremendous setback” to the Centre.
Mr Rawat, whose government was sacked on the grounds of “breakdown of Constitutional machinery”, had moved the high court on Monday calling the Centres decision as “arbitrary” and demanded its quashing.
