The Uttarakhand High Court on Wednesday rejected Centre’s submission for deferring the hearing on former Chief Minister Harish Rawat’s plea challenging the imposition of President’s rule in the state.
A bench comprising Chief Justice K M Joseph and Justice V K Bisht did not allow the plea of two Additional Solicitors General (ASG), representing the Centre, that the hearing be adjourned as a “completely new case” has been set up by Rawat.
ASGs Tushar Mehta and Maninder Singh sought adjournment on the ground that issue of alleged passage of appropriation bill by the state assembly brings in completely new facts and needed to be responded to as they deal with the root of the case.
- Uttarakhand school teacher’s suspension: Harish Rawat terms it insensitive, demands revocation
- It’s business as usual for Justice KM Joseph
- Govt interfering in judiciary, says Sharad Yadav
- Uttarakhand HC asks CBI not to take coercive steps against CM Rawat
- Uttarakhand crisis: SC pulls up HC, hits pause until it gets order in writing
- Uttarakhand HC defers hearing plea of rebel Congress MLAs to April 18
“We are not going to adjourn it. If you want to file a response then file it during the day or by tomorrow,” the bench said and assured the law officers that it would not deal with the issue till Centre files its response.
The bench, however, made clear that it will go ahead with the hearing of the case.
Senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing for the ousted Chief Minister, opposed the Centre’s bid to get the matter adjourned on the ground of filing its response on the issue of appropriation bill.
The appropriation bill is a consolidated legislation on the state’s annual budget which was declared passed by the state Assembly.
The division bench of the High Court had on March 30 stayed the floor test in Uttarakhand Assembly on the petition filed by the Centre.
Staying the order of the single judge, the high court had posted the matter for Wednesday for final hearing on the writ petition filed by Rawat challenging the imposition of President’s rule in the state.
Earlier, the trust vote was slated for March 28 but the Centre imposed President’s rule on March 27, citing “breakdown of Constitutional machinery” in the state.
This was challenged by Rawat before the single judge of the High Court.
The single judge, while ordering the floor test on March 31, had also allowed nine disqualified rebel Congress MLAs to participate in the voting.
On April 1, the High Court had directed the Centre to respond to the writ petition filed by Rawat challenging promulgation of an ordinance by the Union government on the appropriation bill.
Congress had moved the High Court challenging the central ordinance authorising expenditure in the state, which is under President’s rule, contending that the Assembly had duly passed the Appropriation Bill on March 18.