loading...

The Speaker of the State of Karnataka declared that after the resignation of SC Rap he would decide on the rebels by tomorrow.

TRENDING NEWS


New Delhi: Speaker of the Karnataka State Assembly Ramesh
Kumar called on the Supreme Court on Tuesday to change the
previous order, ordering him to maintain the status quo in the
context of the ongoing political crisis in the state, even though
the rebel MLA of the Congress accused him of acts in a partisan
manner, and does not make a decision about resigning.

Senior lawyer A.M. Singhvi, speaking as a speaker, told the panel
headed by Supreme Court Chairman Ranjan Gogoi that by
Wednesday he would make a decision on both disqualification
and resignation of the rebel OMH, but the court must change
its previous order, demanding from it to maintain the status
quo . ,

The senior attorney Mukul Rohtaghi, acting in the rebel OMC,
told the appellate court that, until today, the rapporteur may be
sent to the decision on the dismissal of these MLA, and later
he may decide on disqualification. Rohathi argued that the
speaker could not postpone the resignation of these MLAs
pending, and thus he acted biased.

Unlike his explanations, Singhvi told a colleague that they also
have judges Deepak Gupta and Aniruddha Bose, that speakers
are not prone to mistakes, but he cannot be asked to solve the
problem on time.

TRENDING NEWS


“How can a speaker direct a decision in a certain way?” Asked
Singhvi in ​​court. “Such orders are not transmitted even to the
court of first instance,” he said.

He also said that the actual resignation should be submitted
personally to the Speaker, and the MLA appeared before him
only on July 11, five days after they resigned.

OMS rebels told the court that the speaker resigned, expecting
that he would be simply disqualified, and there was nothing
wrong with resigning to avoid disqualification.

The senior prosecutor Mukul Rohaji, speaking at the LIA rebels,
submitted to the court that the rapporteur could be sent to make
a decision on the resignation of the MLA before 14.00, and later
he could file an application for their disqualification.

The judge asked Rohathi if the Speaker had any constitutional
obligation to make a disqualification decision that began after
his resignation. Rohathi said that the rules said “make a decision
now” about resigning. "How can a speaker hold it on hold?" he
asked.

The MLA rebels told the court that the state government was
reduced to a minority, and the Speaker, not accepting their
resignation, tried to get them to vote for the government with
a vote of confidence.

According to Rohathi, the disqualification process is a mini-
lawsuit in accordance with the 10th Constitutional Schedule,
adding that resignation is different, and its acceptance is based
on only one criterion - regardless of whether it is voluntary or not.

According to the senior prosecutor, there is nothing to prove that
the rebel MLAs conspired with the BJP. According to him, the
disqualification process was nothing more than the failure of the
OMS resignation.

He also informed the court that the disqualification case was
initiated because he was not a disciplined party soldier and did
not attend meetings outside the house.

Then the judge asked if all the statements about disqualification
on the same grounds, to which Rohathi responded "more or less
equally." He also told the court that the speaker should only see
if the resignations were voluntary or not.

“The resignation must be accepted, there is no other way,”
Rohathi said in court. “This is my main right to do everything
that I want, and it cannot be because of the refusal of the
retired speaker,” Rohathi said. According to him, there is a vote
of confidence at the meeting, and the rebel OMC may be forced
to follow the whip, despite the resignation.

Rohathi told the court that 10 MLAs resigned on July 6, and the
decision to disqualify was not made in respect of two deputies.
“When a case was opened on disqualification against the other
eight MLA,” asked the Supreme Court, to which Rohathi replied
that the disqualification case began on July 10.

Ten rebel OMCs filed an appeals court, arguing that the speaker
would not accept their resignation. These are: Pratap Gauda Patil,
Ramesh Yarkioli, Birati Basavaraj, B.S. Patil, S.T. Somashekhar,
Arbil Shivaram Hebbar, Mahesh Kumatkhalli, K. Gopalayya, A.H.
Visvanath and Narayana Govda.

The Court of Appeals, which considered the petition for 10 rebel
OMCs on July 12, will now be heard by six other legislators, who
were looking for the same relief that Karnataka State Assembly
Speaker K. R. Ramesh Kumar also accepts their resignations.

On Friday, the Supreme Court banned the rapporteur from making
a decision on dismissal and disqualification of the rebel CBO before
July 16. The Supreme Court stated that the conditional issue that
may arise on this issue is the type and amount of instructions that
the constitutional court should give to another constitutional official
, who in this case is the speaker of the Assembly.

Post a comment

0 Comments