Live
- Karnataka BJP Criticizes Siddaramaiah Over Wayanad Housing Project
- Lathi-charge on students in Hazaribagh kicks up political row; demand for CBI probe grows
- India’s growth to rebound to 7 pc in 2025-26: Report
- Union Minister Rammohan Naidu inaugurates Airport Predictive Operation Center in Hyderabad
- Delhi has decided to elect BJP CM, oust AAP govt: Harsh Malhotra
- Congress-led UDF winning streak continues in Kerala, ruling CPI-M-led Left suffers reversal
- The Key Players Behind IPL: Discover the Franchise Owners and Their Success Stories
- Harris and Gill join Sydney Thunders for WBBL 11
- PKL Season 11: Bengal Warriorz coach Surve aims for maximum points to secure playoff spot
- Manchu Vishnu Warns Media Over Family Controversy, Mohan Babu Incident
President is not king, he too is fallible: HC
A bench of the Uttarakhand High Court here on Wednesday said the country\'s President is not a King who may be infallible.
Nainital: A bench of the Uttarakhand High Court here on Wednesday said the country's President is not a King who may be infallible.
The strong rebuke over imposition of President's Rule in Uttarakhand came as the bench observed: "Absolute power can spoil anybody's mind and even the President can be wrong and in that case his decisions can be subjected to evaluation."
The Bench said the right to judicial evaluation of orders passed by all courts lies with the courts. The court also went on to say that "Legitimacy of inference drawn by President from the material placed before him is open to judicial review."
Former Uttarakhand chief minister Harish Rawat's advocate and Congress leader Abhishek Manu Singhvi contended that imposition of President's Rule is not permissible on the pretext of a Assembly Speaker approving a legislation and the Governor terming it 'controversial'.
The court had criticised the Central government during the previous hearing over imposition of President’s Rule in Uttarakhand on March 27, a day before the floor test was due to be carried out in the state Assembly.
It also said that there was "absolute absence of material that would create an apprehension in the mind of the Governor" that President's rule needs to be imposed.
"So how did Government of India arrive at the satisfaction that 35 stood up? From Governor's reports?" the court asked. "Governor's letter of March 19 to the President does not mention that 35 MLAs had sought division of votes.
That is conspicuous by its absence. It is absolutely crucial," the bench said. To this, the Centre said that on March 19 the Governor did not have all the details.
The High Court also questioned whether the allegation that former Chief Minister Harish Rawat was "hitting out" at the nine Congress rebel MLAs would constitute material for imposing Article 356.
The court said the "concern" regarding the rebel MLAs was "absolutely irrelevant and unacceptable". It also asked "why the secrecy" regarding the Cabinet notes on imposing President's rule in the state and why it was not to be discussed in the court or even be given to the petitioner (Rawat).
The Uttarakhand political crisis commenced when nine Congress legislators, including former chief minister Vijay Bahuguna, whom Rawat replaced, revolted against the chief minister and turned to the opposition Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) for support.
In the 70-member assembly, the Congress has 36 legislators, including the nine rebels. The BJP has 28. The other six members, from smaller parties, are said to support the Congress.
