![]() Online edition of India's National Newspaper Tuesday, Feb 14, 2006 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Front Page |
|
News:
Front Page |
National |
Tamil Nadu |
Andhra Pradesh |
Karnataka |
Kerala |
New Delhi |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Engagements |
Advts: Classifieds | Employment | Obituary |
Front Page
Legal Correspondent
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday transferred to itself for hearing a batch of petitions filed in the Delhi High Court by 10 expelled Members of Parliament challenging the cessation of their membership. A three-Judge Bench comprising Chief Justice Y.K. Sabharwal, Justice C.K. Thakker and Justice R.V. Raveendran passed this order on a transfer petition filed by the Centre seeking the shifting of the cases to avoid conflicting decisions. The former MPs, nine from the Lok Sabha and one from the Rajya Sabha, had challenged their expulsion in the High Court, which after notice had posted the petitions for hearing on February 16. Acting on a petition from former BSP Member, Rajaram Pal, the apex court had issued notice and referred the matter to a five-Judge Constitution Bench. The Bench tagged the petitions filed in the High Court to be heard along with the petition filed by Mr. Pal. The Bench, after hearing Attorney-General Milon K. Banerjee, Additional Solicitor-General Gopal Subramaniam and counsel for the petitioners and the Election Commission, directed listing of the matter in the week commencing on February 27. It will consider the plea of granting interim relief, viz. stay on elections to the vacant seats and injunction from evicting them from their houses. The petitioners said notices had been served asking them to vacate the premises, telephone lines had been cut and if they continue to retain the houses they should pay Rs. 23,000 as rent. The transfer petition said the question of law related to the power of both the Houses of Parliament to expel their members was a substantial question of law. It said two High Courts had taken different views in the matter and there was no decision on this issue from the apex court. It was also necessary to transfer the petitions with a view to avoiding multiplicity of proceedings and to avoid conflicting judgments.
Printer friendly
page
News:
Front Page |
National |
Tamil Nadu |
Andhra Pradesh |
Karnataka |
Kerala |
New Delhi |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Engagements |
|
|
|
Group Sites: The Hindu | Business Line | Sportstar | Frontline | Publications | eBooks | Images | Home |
Copyright © 2006, The
Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of
this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of
The Hindu
|