Justice in Uttarakhand?
Yes
But how much,
till when?
By Amba Charan
Vashishth
No
gainsaying the fact that the Supreme Court of India has dispensed justice in
Uttarakhand by restoring the Harish Rawat led Congress government supported by
other splinter groups after defection by its 9 MLAs. But how much and for how
long? That remains the question.
The
origin of the trouble lay in the failure of the Uttarakhand CM, state and
Central Congress leadership to stem the rot. Opposition party in the State or
at the Centre whichever it may be, is the easiest whipping boy in such
situations. When a group in any political party fails to be assuaged of its
grievances, it is but natural for it to look for the opposition party to take
its revenge. That is what happened in Uttarakhand. The disgruntled 9 MLAs
sought succour with the opposition BJP, ruling at the Centre.
The
second irritant was the refusal of the Speaker to accede to the demand of the
dissident MLAs for a division after he announced passage of the Budget with a
voice vote, knowing full well that these MLAs besides the opposition BJP were opposing
it. Even in the normal course, it is a tradition with Speakers to allow
division whenever a member or group demands. To cite one instance, during the
consideration of the amendments to the Vote of Thanks to the President in the
Lok Sabha in March this year, a member refused to withdraw his amendment. It
was put to vote. The Speaker after seeking Ayes and Noes, announced that the
amendment stood rejected. But the mover of the amendment wanted a division
which the Speaker instantly granted. Everybody knows that the ruling party at
the Centre enjoys unquestioned majority. Yet the Speaker generously consented.
But in Uttarakhand, when the majority of the Government was in question, it was
but desirable that the division should have been allowed. That precipitated the
matter. The matter is before the court.
The
Governor had fixed April 28 as the date for the CM to seek a vote of confidence
on the floor of the House. In the meantime, CM sought disqualification of the 9
MLAs. On the eve of vote of confidence, the Speaker on April 27 — according to
some media reports — after the promulgation of President's rule by the Centre
on that very day — disqualified them putting the CM in a win-win situation. Two
days earlier had appeared a sting operation which clearly showed CM Rawat
telling that he is willing to pay a hefty sum the next day after MLAs vote in
his favour. How could this sting be brushed aside as of now consequence without
investigation? Was the government — and for that matter, even law and judiciary
— allow corruption to take place and not take preventive action?
There
was a great drama on the judiciary level too. First, the High Court set aside
the promulgation of the President's rule and fixed date for vote of confidence.
The CM instantly took charge again, held a cabinet meeting where some policy
decisions were taken even without getting a copy of the High Court order. How
could a CM who had to prove his majority in the House after three days take
policy decisions? But nobody took offence to it.
The
Central government knocked the door of the Supreme Court which immediately stayed
the operation of the High Court order and cancelled the date fixed for vote of
confidence. The President's rule stood imposed again within 24 hours and Harish
Rawat was no longer the CM. After hearing both the parties during which Centre
agreed for a vote of confidence, the Supreme Court directed that the
President's rule shall stand lifted for two hours between 11 AM to 1 PM on May
10 during which the assembly will meet for a vote of confidence. In other words
Harish Rawat was again CM for two hours.Then
came the announcement that the SC will hear the petition of the 9 MLAs against
their disqualification on May 9, a day before the vote of confidence. That
added suspense to the whole drama. But on that day it refused to stay the
disqualification and directed that the concerned MLAs will not be allowed to
vote. But SC fixed a regular hearing of the case after summer vacations in
July. Obviously, this tilted the balance in favour of the CM, unless there was
another bout of defections and re-alignment of political forces in between.
(It
is worth recalling that in 2011 the Karnataka High Court had allowed 16 disqualified MLAs to vote in the confidence sought
by the then chief minister.)
After
the count was over, a report was sent to the Supreme Court which on May 11
accepted that Rawat commanded a majority.
But
the Sword of Damocles continues to hang and torment the Harish Rawat government.
What will happen in July if the SC sets aside the disqualification of the 9
MLAs? Then the result of the vote of
confidence in the Assembly on May 10 will become a nullity. The absence of a
final decision in the matter is responsible for injecting this element of uncertainty.
What will be the legal position of the Rawat government and the decisions taken
by it in the interregnum?
The
whole situation in Uttarakhand seems to be emerging like a circus. Nobody knows
what will happen next. Leave aside the difficulties Harish Rawat will encounter
because of re-alignment of political forces and his total dependence for subsistence
on the support of independents and other splinter groups which are sure to
demand their pound of flesh. The State is due for general elections after about
7 months. And nobody knows what will happen in between after two months. If
political forces are responsible for the present mess in the State, the
judiciary too has failed to clear the clouds by having not given its final
verdict.***
