Uttarakhand High Court on Wednesday rejected Centre’s submission for deferring the hearing on former Chief Minister Harish Rawat’s plea challenging the imposition of the President’s Rule in the State. The hearing will continue on Thursday. A bench comprising Chief Justice K M Joseph and Justice VK Bisht has not allowed the plea of two additional Solicitors General (ASG) Tushar Mehta and Maninder Singh, representing the Centre, that the hearing be adjourned as a “completely new case” has been set up by Rawat.
ASGs Tushar Mehta and Maninder Singh sought adjournment on the ground that issue of alleged passage of appropriation Bill by the State Assembly had brought completely new facts which needed to be responded to as they deal with the root of the case.
The bench said, “We are not going to adjourn it. If you want to file a response you may file it during the day or by tomorrow.” They, however, assured the law officers that it would not deal with the issue till Centre files its response. The bench, however, made clear that it will go ahead with the hearing of the case.
Senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing for the ousted Chief Minister, opposed the Centre’s bid to get the matter adjourned on the ground of filing its response on the issue of appropriation Bill.
The appropriation Bill is a consolidated legislation on the State’s annual budget which was declared passed by the State Assembly on March 18.
It should be mentioned here that the division bench of the High Court had on March 30 stayed the floor test in Uttarakhand Assembly on the petition filed by the Centre. Keeping the order of the single judge in abeyance, the High Court had posted the matter for Wednesday for the final hearing on the writ petition filed by Harish Rawat, challenging the imposition of President’s Rule in the State.
Senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi appeared on behalf of Rawat, while Additional Solicitor-Generals Tushar Mehta and Maninder Singh argued the case on behalf of the Union Government on Wednesday. Citing Supreme Court verdicts on the famous cases involving Rameshwar Nath in Bihar and SR Bomai in Karnataka, Singhvi, also a senior Congress leader and party spokesman, argued that circumstances were not suitable for invoking Article 356 of the Constitution and imposing President’s Rule in the State.
BJP senior leader and advocate Nalin Kohli refused to comment over this issue, stating that matter is before the court. “We would fight in the court robustly,” he affirmed.