R Sedhuraman

Legal Correspondent

New Delhi, April 21

The Supreme Court on Friday restored President’s rule in Uttarakhand till April 27 after Centre’s virtual assurance that no attempt would be made to install a BJP government in that state.

A Bench comprising Justices Dipak Misra and Shiva Kirti Singh passed the order after hearing arguments for 70 minutes on Centre’s appeal against the Uttarakhand High Court verdict yesterday, quashing the President’s rule and reviving the dismissed Congress government led by Chief Minister Harish Rawat.

Arguing for the Centre, Attorney-General Mukul Rohatgi took strong exception to Rawat resuming charge as Chief Minister and holding a Cabinet meeting immediately after the high court ruling without even waiting for a copy of the high court judgment.

The high court verdict, dictated in the open court, was not yet made available and in view of this Governor KK Paul was still in charge of the state administration, while Rawat also claimed to be back in power. “How can two authorities be in charge of the state running parallel administrations,” the A-G asked.

The apex court slated the next hearing for April 27 and asked the high court to make its judgment available by April 26.

Appearing for Rawat, senior advocate Abhishekh Singhvi pleaded with the Supreme Court against passing any interim order as it amounted to allowing the Centre’s plea. He assured the Bench that his client was ready to stay away from the Chief Minister’s Office till the Supreme Court heard the case after getting a copy of the high court judgment. But the Bench was not amenable to this option.

The Bench said it was keeping the high court verdict in abeyance till April 27 for maintaining the balance of convenience. It recorded the Centre’s assurance that President’s rule would not be lifted till then. In the absence of any such assurance, the Centre would have been at liberty to pave the way for a BJP government. The high court had also directed Rawat to prove his majority on the floor of the Assembly on April 29 and this would now depend on Supreme Court hearing on April 27.

Rohatgi argued that the Centre had imposed President’s rule on March 27, ahead of a floor test slated for March 29, to prevent horse-trading which was evident from a sting operation that showed Rawat trying to win back the support of nine rebel Congress MLAs by offering money.

The Assembly Speaker’s senior counsel Kapil Sibal countered this contention by arguing that the Centre did not find anything wrong when the same rebel Congress MLAs wanted to side with the BJP. How it could become horse-trading only when the MLAs wanted to come back to the Congress, he asked.

Rohatgi said the trigger for the political crisis in the state was a money Bill sought to be passed in the Assembly on March 18. All the 27 BJP MLAs and the nine rebel Congress MLAs in the 70-member House wanted a division by show of hands or actual voting, but the Speaker declared the Bill passed through voice vote. Had the voting taken place, the Congress government would have fallen that day itself, he pleaded.

Sibal and Singhvi, however, said money Bill could not be given the status of a confidence vote. At best, losing the Appropriation Bill would necessitate a floor test for ascertaining the government’s status in the House – majority or minority? Also, there was nothing on record to show that the rebel Congress MLAs had sought division. The demand was made in writing only by the BJP MLAs, Sibal said.

In its appeal, the Centre has pleaded that the high court replaced the President’s views for imposing Central rule with its own conclusions which was not done.

Appearing for the nine rebel MLAs, senior advocate Aryaman Sundaram said there was no point in going ahead with the floor test on April 29 as directed by the high court as the complexion of the House had changed following the illegal disqualification of his clients by the Speaker.