When the lawmakers violate legislations….

For Manipur, it is okay to violate the laws provided under the Constitution of India. Over 32 revolutionary groups are operating in the region waging war against the Government of India challenging and disrespecting the law framed under the Constitution of India. It is indeed a morale boost to the armed revolutionary groups when some people who had become lawmakers and took an oath to abide by the provisions given in the Constitution of India if they themselves violate it. If these lawmakers make a mockery of the Indian constitution they definitely deserve appreciation from all armed revolutionary groups waging war against the Government of India.
One disqualified MLA from the 11 Manipur Legislative Assembly who had been appointed as Minister in the N. Biren Singh led government in recognition of his loyalty to the BJP led government. This appointment is done as per the Article as per 164(1) of the Constitution of India. But as per article 164 (4), it is also stated that ‘A Minister who for any period of six consecutive months is not a member of the Legislature of the State shall at the expiration of that period cease to be a Minister”.
An interesting co-incidental issue with this is about the appointing of a Minister called Tej Parkash Singh in the S.R. Chaudhari v. The State of Punjab through its Secretary the S.R. Chaudhari vs. The State of Punjab through its Secretary (High Court Of Punjab And Haryana) Civil Writ Petition No. 18526 of 1996 | 03-12-1996.
Without getting elected Tej Parkash Singh was appointed by former Panjab Chief Minister, S. Harcharan Singh Brar on 9.9.1995 and he remained so for a period of six months under the provisions of the Constitution of India i.e. Article 164 (4).
A little different from what has been happening here is that Tej Parkash Singh tender resignation after six months. But again when Rajinder Kaur Bhattal, became the Chief Minister, Tej Parkash was appointed as Minister for Transport with effect from 23.11.1996.
The court ruling said that there is no provision that one can be appointed as a Minister only once in a life for a period of six months especially when there is no semblance of continuity. As mentioned earlier, respondent Tej Parkash Singh was appointed and he ceased to be a Minister as he could not become a member of the Legislature. There is no bar that after the gap of six months, he could not be appointed as a Minister. Thus he continues as Minister without getting elected.
Now what makes the issue of Manipur’s Minister appointed without getting elected and that of Tej Parkash is that the Manipur Minister didn’t tender resignation. But continue to remain as Minister.
As per this case, the Minister could have resigned and again could be appointed in one or two days, reoffering this case. Instead, he blamed the delay in conducting the election which is not at all relevant to the specific issue.
Another mockery of democracy by an ex-minister who had been disqualified under the Tenth Schedule of the Indian constitution is that he made a public announcement through media stating that he will contest the by-election in his constituency. Well, is the law or ruling of the court or the ruling of the Speaker’s tribunals untouchable to some few people.
As per the ruling of the Speaker’s tribunal, it was clearly mentioned that the said person to be named Th. Shyamkumar has been ceased to be a member of the 11th Manipur Legislative Assembly. The 11th Manipur Legislative Assembly is still on and how could he contest and become a member again. It will be a gross violation of the Speaker of Manipur Legislative Assembly if he contests and become a member again for this same term.