IT News
Imphal, June 8:
Manipur High Court today restrained 7 Congress MLAs who have defected and joined the BJP, from entering the Manipur Legislative Assembly with immediate effect until the Speaker of the Manipur Legislative Assembly decides and disposed the final hearing of the petition filed under the 10th Schedule of the Indian Constitution.
With the High Court order, the 7 MLAs – Sanasam Bira Singh, MLA; Ginsuanhau, Oinam Lukhoi Singh, Ngamthang Haokip, Yengkhom Surchandra Singh, Kshetrimayum Bira Sing, and Paonam Brojen Singh may not be able to cast their vote in the upcoming Rajya Sabha Election scheduled on June 19.
The Manipur High Court order is significant in deciding the fate of the 7 Congress MLAs, as the Tribunal of Manipur Legislative Assembly had on Saturday dismissed the objection plea against the disqualification petition. Similar, ruling to bar MLA from entering the state Assembly premises was heard from Supreme Court of India in connection with a similar case before the tribunal of the Manipur Legislative Assembly disqualified him on March 28 this year.
Senior advocate Kapil Sibal appeared for the petitioner. In the miscellaneous petition submitted by him, it was stated that although the applications for disqualification of the MLAs were filed before the Speaker on November 8,2018, notices were issued only on 10-07-2019; that despite a number of opportunities being granted to the private respondents, no replies were filed by them and only on February 3, 2020 and that too, after the judgment being delivered by the Supreme Court in Keisham Meghachandra Singh Vs. The Hon’ble Speaker, Manipur Legislative Assembly & ors., CA No.547 of 2020 etc., the preliminary objections were filed; that the
Speaker being a party respondent in K. Meghachandra Singh (supra), knew very well that he was bound by the judgment of the Supreme Court and the petitions ought to have been decided by him within three months as directed; that the failure on the part of the Speaker to decide the petitions within three months from the date on which the judgment was intimated to him, is nothing but legally malafide as observed in Kihoto Hollohan Vs. Zachillhu, (1992) Supp (2) SCC 651 and that a preliminary objection similar to the one raised herein, has already been rejected by the Speaker himself in K. Meghachandra Singh (supra).
