NEW DELHI: “This is not the Speaker versus the Court. This is between the Chief Minister and somebody who wants to become the chief minister and bring down this government.”
This was the argument made by senior advocate Rajeev Dhavan, appearing for Karnataka Chief Minister H D Kumaraswamy, while urging the Supreme Court to vacate its two interim orders asking the Speaker to decide on the resignations of the rebel MLAs and maintain a status quo.
“Resignations by the rebel Congress-JD(S) MLAs can’t be only about the intent but it has to be more about the motive. If the motive is to bring the government down, the Speaker is bound under the constitution to conduct an inquiry. Speaker has to be satisfied about voluntariness and genuineness of the resignations,” Dhavan told the bench headed by CJI Ranjan Gogoi.
Dhavan said the apex court had no power to interfere in Speaker’s duties and that it exceeded its jurisdiction by passing an interim order asking Speaker to decide on the resignation of the MLAs forthwith on July 11.
“This court can interfere only after the decision is made, not before that. There is no scope of judicial review prior to making of a decision by the Speaker,” he argued.
On the argument put forward by the MLAs over as to why the Speaker is keen on deciding the disqualification plea first and then on resignations, Dhavan said it wasn’t important.
“The constitution doesn’t say what has to be decided first.”
“This court has reproached ‘Aaya Ram Gaya Ram’ while acknowledging the constitutional function of the Speaker. The only instance the court can interfere is when the Speaker’s decision is perverse,” he said, concluding his arguments.
Dhavan cites SC rule
Dhavan said that rules of the apex court are clear that it will not entertain any petition under Article 32 of the Constitution unless there is a violation of fundamental rights