The Hindu : Petition against Lok Sabha dissolution dismissed

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Saturday, Feb 14, 2004

National

National

Petition against Lok Sabha dissolution dismissed

By J. Venkatesan

NEW DELHI, FEB. 13. The Supreme Court today dismissed at the admission stage a public interest petition challenging the Constitutional validity of the dissolution of the 13th Lok Sabha observing that "it has no merits."

A three-Judge Bench, comprising the Chief Justice V.N. Khare, Justice Brijesh Kumar and Justice S.H. Kapadia said, "the dissolution of the House through a Presidential proclamation cannot be challenged in courts."

The Bench asked the petitioner, Viplav Sharma that "the House has already been dissolved and do you think we can restore it back." (The President had dissolved the House on February 6 as recommended by the Union Cabinet on January 27.) It pointed out that "the consistent view is that it is the sole prerogative of the Prime Minister heading the Union Council of Ministers to advise dissolution of the House to the President. Only when the Prime Minister has lost the confidence of the House that the President was not bound by his advice."

The petitioner assailed the recommendation of the Union Cabinet for the dissolution of the Lok Sabha describing it as "unconstitutional and ill-suited and [a] fraud on the people and the Constitution". He submitted that for the dissolution of the Lok Sabha before the expiry of its term, the President under Article 85(2)(b) of the Constitution enjoyed legislative power and not executive power to be exercised with the "aid and advice of the Council of Ministers." As such the advice given by the Cabinet to the President to dissolve the Lok Sabha was ultra vires of the Constitution, illegal, without authority and invalid.

He said the Cabinet had taken the decision in the background of the Bharatiya Janata Party's national executive and the National Democratic Alliance's steering committee had approved the idea of early dissolution.

The petitioner submitted that the recommendation for the dissolution of the Lok Sabha had not been made in good faith and for bona fide reasons. ``It had been done for the benefit of some persons seeking to remain and cling to power with all comforts, facilities and amenities at the cost of public exchequer.'' He said the decision was arbitrary, improper and based on the wholly non-existent and extraneous considerations and not in the interest of the country.

He said the President could dissolve the House before the expiry of the term of the House only if it was not discharging the functions and duties as enshrined in the Constitution and when the Government lost its majority. But now no such situation existed and hence there was no ground to dissolve the House.

Contending that the recommendation was contrary to the oath taken by the Prime Minister and his Council of Ministers, the petitioner sought a direction to quash the impugned recommendation to dissolve the Lok Sabha. Further, he wanted the court to interpret the constitutional scheme as to the circumstances in which the House could be prematurely dissolved.

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

National