Explains that the choice of the Maharashtra Legislative Assembly To droop 12 BJP MLAs Raising questions of menace to democracy for a interval of 1 12 months, the Supreme Court on Tuesday puzzled what would occur if a authorities, which has solely a slim majority, determined to droop greater than a dozen opposition members for lengthy durations. Selects choice.
Questioning the reasonableness of the meeting motion, Justice CT Ravikumar, sharing a three-judge bench, questioned senior advocate Arayama Sundaram, who tried to argue on behalf of Maharashtra {that a} member must be given a time period of 1 12 months. There is not any constitutional bar on suspension.
“One other thing is a menace to democracy. Suppose there’s a slim lead of majority, and 15-20 persons are suspended, then what would be the destiny of democracy?,” Justice Ravikumar requested.
A bench headed by Justice AM Khanwilkar and Justice Dinesh Maheshwari mentioned on the final date of listening to that the suspension was prima facie unconstitutional.
The bench referred to Article 190(4) of the Constitution and mentioned that beneath the related guidelines, the Assembly has no energy to droop a member for greater than 60 days. It additionally states {that a} constituency can not stay with out illustration for greater than six months beneath Section 151A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. The court docket had mentioned that it’s a query of depriving a constituency of illustration within the House.
On Tuesday, Justice Khanwilkar mentioned, “When we say that the action should be rational, there must be some purpose to the suspension and the purpose is with respect to the session. It should not go beyond the session. Anything else would be irrational… There must be some purpose… some coercive reason. Your decision of one year is irrational as the constituency is not being represented for more than six months. We are now talking about the spirit of parliamentary law.”
“The Election Commission also has a role to play. Where there are vacancies, elections are to be held. If a person is expelled, election will be held but in case of suspension there will be no election,” Justice Ravikumar mentioned.
Sundaram argued that the remedial energy vested within the legislature just isn’t restricted, and mentioned that if the facility vested within the legislature just isn’t restricted by constitutional or parliamentary process, it can’t be mentioned to be irrational.
The bench mentioned the facility to droop a member is to allow the House to hold on the enterprise of the session. “Where is the rationality beyond that,” it requested. “After all, power cannot be quashed. As with constitutional and legal standards, there are limits.”
“Article 184 provides for sessions. What is the question of meeting only in sessions?… They can be suspended in a particular session. But beyond that comes the question of rationality,” Justice Maheshwari mentioned.
Justice Khanwilkar mentioned that the query just isn’t of an elected member however of democratic proper. “Legislative power is not inexhaustible, the court has held,” he mentioned.
Sundaram mentioned {that a} seat doesn’t mechanically fall vacant if a member doesn’t seem within the House for 60 days, however will probably be vacant provided that the House declares so.
Asked by the bench whether or not the House just isn’t certain to declare such a seat vacant, the senior counsel mentioned there was no such requirement and mentioned that the terminology used within the related a part of the Constitution is “may” and never Will be It can be for the legislature to resolve on it, he mentioned, including that it could be free from judicial evaluate.
Sundaram concluded his arguments on Tuesday. Senior advocate Mahesh Jethmalani will resume the arguments for the petitioner MLAs on Wednesday.
MLAs Sanjay Kute, Ashish Shelar, Abhimanyu Pawar, Girish Mahajan, Atul Bhatkalkar, Parag Alwani, Harish Pimple, Yogesh Sagar, Jai Kumar Rawat, Narayan Kuche, Ram Satpute and Bunty Bhangadiya have been suspended on July 5 final 12 months after the state authorities alleged was accomplished. For “misbehaving” with the presiding officer Bhaskar Jadhav within the Speaker’s chamber.
,
With inputs from TheIndianEXPRESS
