New Delhi: A public interest litigation petition was filed in the Supreme Court on Tuesday, questioning under what authority Prime Minister Manmohan Singh is continuing in office after completing his Rajya Sabha term in April.

Gandhian R.S. Sanwal (76) said in the petition that there was a flagrant violation of the provisions of the Constitution insofar as it related to the duration of Council of States provided under Article 83.

The Council of States was constituted on April 3, 1952 and after the reorganisation of States in 1956, by-elections were held to fill vacancies in various States. A clear provision was made for retirement of one-third members as on April 2, 1958 and on the expiration of every second year thereafter.

The cycle of biennial retirement of members of the Council of States, as contemplated under Article 83 (1), got disturbed in the last several years because elections could not be held as and when they became due. This was because Legislative Assemblies of the States concerned, which were to elect these members, were not in existence and the States were under President's rule.

The petitioner said he had written several letters to the Centre, the Election Commission and others to ensure that every biennial election was held in April but all the authorities ignored his representations.

He submitted that Dr. Singh was elected to the Rajya Sabha from Assam on June 15, 2001 and he ought to have retired on April 2, 2006, as biennial elections should have been held in April 2000 itself.

As provided under Article 75 (5), a person could continue as Minister for six months without being elected to any of the Houses.

If this provision was taken into account, Dr. Singh cannot legally hold any office beyond October 2.

His continuance was in violation of Article 75 (5), the petitioner said and sought a direction to Dr. Singh to show the authority under which he was holding the office.

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