0.2236
7667766266
x

Rajasthan HC & Sachin Pilot Camp

iasparliament Logo
July 25, 2020

Why in news?

The Rajasthan High Court’s (HC’s) order pertaining to  Sachin Pilot camp borders on judicial indiscipline.

What is the order?

  • The HC order has admitted a petition filed by the 19 legislators in the Sachin Pilot camp.
  • It does not give any reason for admitting the petition and overruling objections to its admissibility.
  • Illogically, the petition has been declared maintainable on the ground that a Constitutional court proposes to examine its maintainability.
  • The order has directed the assembly speaker not to disqualify these legislators under the anti-defection law (ADL), until further notice.
  • The HC has passed this order despite an existing judgment of the Supreme Court (SC) on the constitutionality of the ADL.

What is the Anti-Defection Law?

  • The ADL is contained in the Tenth Schedule of the Constitution.
  • Purpose - To curb political defection by the legislators.
  • It came into effect in 1985.
  • Reason - In the Indian political scene for a long time, the legislators used to change parties frequently.
  • Due to this, the governments had fallen, creating political instability.
  • This caused serious concerns to the right-thinking political leaders of the country and at last, the ADL was enacted.

What is the problem with the HC’s move?

  • It has disregarded the doctrine of precedent.
  • The SC prohibits the courts intervening in disqualification matters at a stage prior to a presiding officer giving a ruling.
  • The question is whether the SC’s judgment in Kihoto Hollohan (1992) is a bar on the HC examining the issues.

What was the 1992 judgment?

  • This judgment upheld the validity of the anti-defection law.
  • It also declared that Para 2 does not violate the freedom of speech, vote or conscience of elected members.
  • [Para 2 has been used by Speakers to disqualify MLAs.
  • Para 2 is the part of the law which is now under challenge and is the ostensible reason for the HC to entertain the petition.]

What is the HC trying to find out?

  • It wants to examine the disqualification of lawmakers who voluntarily give up membership of their party.
  • It wants to know whether this disqualification has been examined by the SC from the point of view of intra-party democracy.

Why does the HC’s move amount to judicial indiscipline?

  • If at all the provision’s validity is to be tested, it can only be done in a case arising out of it.
  • But, it is a fact that no decision has been rendered by the Speaker.
  • So, it is beyond comprehension how the court entertained arguments on the issuance of the notice.
  • Another question is regarding whether dissidents can be disqualified for questioning the party line.
  • Para 2 has been used by Speakers for years, and many such disqualification orders have been upheld by the SC.
  • Admitting a matter without explaining how the law laid down by the SC does not bind a HC raises grave questions of judicial propriety.

What should the SC do?

  • The SC appears to be raising the question whether dissent within a party can attract disqualification proceedings.
  • Whatever the circumstances, the SC should not excuse improper and premature judicial intervention.

 

Source: The Hindu

Login or Register to Post Comments
There are no reviews yet. Be the first one to review.

ARCHIVES

MONTH/YEARWISE ARCHIVES

sidetext
Free UPSC Interview Guidance Programme
sidetext