New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Friday issued notice to concerned respondents on the Himachal Pradesh Government plea challenging the High Court order quashing the appointment of six chief parliamentary secretaries.
The top court also directed till the next date of hearing, there will be no further proceedings relating to Himachal HC order on disqualification of MLAs appointed as CPS.
A bench of Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud and justice Sanjay Kumar also made it clear that no further appointment will be made and if it is done then it will be contrary to law. The top court also tagged the matter with other similar petitions.
Also Read |
SC seeks ECI, Centre's response over plea seeking decriminalisation of complaints regarding EVM malfunction
The top court said that till the next date of hearing, there will be no further proceedings in view of para 50 of the impugned judgement of Himachal Pradesh High Court. During the hearing the top court also remarked that as per thumb rule when it admits appeal, it will not allow the disqualification.
HP High Court has quashed the appointment of six chief parliamentary secretaries. The Himachal Pradesh High in its para 50 said, "Accordingly, protection granted to such appointment to the office of Chief Parliamentary Secretary/ or Parliamentary Secretary as per Section 3 with Clause (d) of Himachal Pradesh Legislative Assembly Members (Removal of Disqualifications) Act, 1971 is also declared illegal and unconstitutional and thus, claim of such protection under above referred Section 3(d) is inconsequential. Natural consequences and legal implications whereof shall follow forthwith in accordance with law."
Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal appeared for the state government. In the plea filed through advocate on record, Sugandha Anand, HP govt highlighted the legal consequence and said that it will lead political instability as the 6 parliamentary secretaries, who are also Member of Legislative Assembly are likely to face disqualification.
Also Read |
National: Plea in Supreme Court seeks free unlimited calling, data usage during lockdown
"That, while deciding the vires of a particular Act, a constitutional Court ought not to have, ventured to declare a provision of another Act as unconstitutional, which was not a subject matter of lis between parties.
The impugned order needs to be stayed and set aside on this count itself," HP Govt urged.
"It is to be noted that there are certain offices at state level which are granted cabinet minister rank and privileges but those offices do not perform any function prescribed for ministers under Article 163 or 164 of the Constitution of India. Thus, the appointment of Parliamentary Secretary which do not perform any function of the minister under Article 164(1A) cannot be held to be unconstitutional. It is to be noted that the leader of opposition in State of Himachal Pradesh is granted the rank of Cabinet Minister, however, does not perform, any functions of a minister. The impugned order does not discuss any of the submissions made by the Petitioner in this behalf," the HP govt said in the petition. (with Agency inputs)
