New Delhi:

The Supreme Court will hear a petition by six rebel Congress MLAs of Himachal Pradesh on Tuesday. The MLAs — who cross-voted in the recent Rajya Sabha polls in Himachal Pradesh — had challenged their disqualification by the Speaker. A bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna, Dipankar Datta and Prashant Kumar Mishra will hear the plea.

On February 29, Speaker Kuldeep Singh Pathania had disqualified them for “defying” the Congress whip that required them to be present in the House and vote for the budget.

The rebels had voted in favour of BJP nominee Harsh Mahajan in the Rajya Sabha election on February 27. Senior Congress leader Abhishek Singhvi had lost the Rajya Sabha election owing to the cross-voting.

The disqualified MLAs are Rajinder Rana, Sudhir Sharma, Inder Dutt Lakhanpal, Devinder Kumar Bhutoo, Ravi Thakur and Chetanya Sharma.

Following their disqualification, the effective strength of the Himachal Pradesh assembly has slid from 68 to 62, while the number of Congress MLAs has shrunk from 40 to 34.

In their petition, the rebel MLAs have alleged violation of the principle of natural justice, claiming they did not get adequate opportunity to respond to the disqualification petition.

This was the first time in Himachal Pradesh, an MLA was disqualified under the anti-defection law aimed at checking defections.

Announcing the disqualification of the six MLAs on February 29, the Speaker said they attracted disqualification under the anti-defection law as they defied the party whip. He ruled that they ceased to be members of the House with immediate effect.

The petition seeking their disqualification was filed by the Parliamentary Affairs Minister.
Senior advocate Satya Pal Jain, who appeared for the rebel Congress MLAs, had argued that they were only given the show-cause notice and not the copy of the petition or the annexure. He also pointed out that seven days were mandatorily allowed for replying to the notice but no time was given to them.

Under the anti-defection law, any elected member who gives up the membership of a political party voluntarily or votes or abstains from voting in the House, contrary to any direction issued by his political party, is liable for disqualification.

The rebel MLAs had signed the attendance register but abstained from voting on the Budget, the Speaker said. They were issued notices for defying the whip through WhatsApp and e-mail and were asked to appear for the hearing.

(This story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)

New Delhi:

Intense arguments in the case related to Aam Aadmi Party’s (AAP) alleged encroachment were interspersed with some humour this afternoon when Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud told senior advocate Abhishek Singhvi that he should not have appeared for the political party in this case. “In this matter, you should not appear. You cannot oppose land for Delhi High Court. You should be supporting us,” the Chief Justice told Mr Singhvi in a lighter vein.

The court today ordered the Arvind Kejriwal-led party to vacate the plot on Delhi’s Rouse Avenue, now called Deen Dayal Upadhyay Marg, by June 15. It noted that the land was allotted to the Delhi High Court for expanding its infrastructure.

The three-judge bench of Chief Justice Chandrachud and Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra has asked AAP to approach the Land and Development office for an alternate plot for its headquarters. The court said it would request the Land and Development office to respond to AAP’s application within four weeks. The department comes under the Centre’s Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs.

Arguing on behalf of AAP, Mr Singhvi said the party is entitled to a plot for its headquarters and underlined that it is among six national parties in the country. “I cannot be put on the road ahead of the elections. This matter can be solved through some political cooperation,” said Mr Singhvi, also a senior Congress leader. He said the party has been offered a plot in Badarpur. “They are telling us that as a national party, we get nothing. I am given Badarpur, while others are at better places. Let all the parties then relocate to Badarpur,” Mr Singhvi said.

The Chief Justice responded, “You are using our good offices to get a plot. How can we permit it?”

In the course of the arguments, Mr Singhvi also said the Delhi High Court is his parent court. “I don’t want them to be denied space,” he said.

Appearing for the Centre, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta said AAP must vacate the plot. “How can they hold the Supreme Court and High Court to ransom,” he asked.

The Supreme last month pulled up AAP over the alleged encroachment. “No one can take law into their own hands. How can a political party sit tight on that? Unencumbered possession must be given to the High Court. What will the High Court use it for? Only for the public and citizens. Why was the land then allotted to the High Court?” the Chief Justice had said.

The court took note of the matter while looking at cases related to judicial infrastructure across the country.

The AAP has denied allegations of encroachment. It has said the plot was allotted to the party by the Delhi government. Mr Singhvi today said the plot was allotted to AAP in 2015. Amicus Curiae K Parmeshwar pointed out that the plot was earmarked in 2022 for the construction of family courts, and noted that nothing was brought to the notice of the High Court to show that the land had been allotted to any political party.