The Supreme Court will take up the plea on July 26 regarding the fate of 12 MLAs, who were facing disqualification in a 2018 ‘office of profit’ case for holding the position of parliamentary secretaries.
TFM Desk
Congress Working Committee, All India Congress Committee member Gaikhangam has exuded confidence that justice will prevail when the Supreme Court will take up the plea on July 26 regarding the fate of 12 MLAs, who are facing disqualification in a 2018 ‘office of profit’ case for holding the position of parliamentary secretaries.
The plea has been filed by Congress MLA DD Thaisii. The plea alleged that the Election Commission of India has failed to discharge its constitutional duty.
Speaking to media persons in Imphal on Saturday, Gaikhangam maintained that there was no point in arguing. “When the Supreme Court examines the case on July 26, I am sure they will do justice,” he added.
What is the case about?
Soon after coming to power in 2017, the BJP-led state government appointed 12 MLAs — eight from BJP, three from Naga People’s Front and one independent. They are L Susindro (Khurai AC), N Indrajit (Kshetrigao AC), L Rameshwor (Keirao AC), Th Satyabrata (Yaiskul AC), H Dingo (Sekmai AC), Dr S Ranjan (Konthoujam AC), S Subashchandra (Naoriya Pakhanglakpa AC), K Robindro (Mayang Imphal AC), Leishiyo Keishing (Phungyar AC), Khasim Vashum (Chingai AC), Awangbow Newmai (Tamei AC), and Asab Uddin (Jiribam AC).
They resigned from their posts later in 2017 soon after their appointment was challenged in the court.
While the law relevant to office of profit bars MPs and MLAs from holding a position under the government, the 12 MLAs held positions of parliamentary secretaries under an exemption granted by two laws passed in the last decade.
These were the Manipur Parliamentary Secretary (Appointment, Salary and Allowances and Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 2012, and the Manipur Parliamentary (Appointment, Salary and Allowances and Miscellaneous Provisions) Repealing Act, 2018.
Both Acts ceased to exist after the Manipur High Court pronounced them invalid and unconstitutional in a judgment on September 17, 2020.
After the HC declared these Acts void ab initio, the Congress had approached governor Najma Heptulla seeking disqualification of the 12 MLAs on account of holding the position of parliamentary secretaries, which qualified as ‘office of profit’ after the HC ruling.
The governor had sought the EC’s views on the matter in October last year.
In a letter to Heptulla in January this year, the EC is learnt to have opined that since the Acts mentioned above were in force at the time they held the office, the MLAs could not be disqualified for holding office of profit retrospectively.
In December last year, a delegation of Congress leaders had also appealed to the EC to decide the matter of disqualification of 12 Manipur legislators in the office of profit case.
Arguing that the case of the Manipur MLAs called for disqualification, Congress leaders had made a reference to the Supreme Court order dated July 26, 2017 in the case of Bimalangshu Roy vs the state of Assam, according to which appointing elected representatives of the land as parliamentary secretaries violates the law.
The EC, in 2018, had recommended the disqualification of 20 Aam Aadmi Party MLAs, who were also holding the position of parliamentary secretaries, on account of office of profit.
However, the Manipur BJP MLAs case is different since there was a protection granted to them in law earlier, which was subsequently declared unconstitutional.