Earlier on November 9, the Supreme Court orally observed that the Governor of Manipur cannot delay taking a decision on the opinion given by the Election Commission of India (ECI) regarding the disqualification of 12 BJP MLAs of Manipur Assembly in the “office of profit” issue.
TFM Desk
Solicitor General of India on Thursday assured the Supreme Court that the Manipur Governor will take a decision soon on the opinion given by the Election Commission of India regarding the disqualification of 12 BJP MLAs of Manipur Assembly in the “office of profit” issue.
The assurance was given by Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta before the bench of Justices LN Rao, BR Gavai and BV Nagarathna, said a report by LiveLaw.
The bench was hearing a writ petition filed by DD Thaisii, Congress MLA from Manipur, who sought for disqualification of these 12 MLAs on the ground that they were holding the posts of Parliamentary Secretaries, which amounted to “offices of profit”. When the matter was called for hearing, Justice L Nageswara Rao presiding judge of the bench told the Solicitor General to use his good offices so that the same can be given.
“In January, an opinion was given by the Election Commission. According to Article 192(of Constitution), the Governor has to go with the decisions. In11 month nothing has happened. We don’t want to pass an order but please your good offices so that opinion is given so that they can be challenged,” Justice Rao told the Solicitor General. “I assure we’ll do something and no direction will be required to be passed,” Solicitor General replied.
Earlier on November 9, the Supreme Court orally observed that the Governor of Manipur cannot delay taking a decision on the opinion given by the Election Commission of India (ECI) regarding the disqualification of 12 BJP MLAs of Manipur Assembly in the “office of profit” issue.
A bench comprising Justices L Nageswara Rao, BR Gavai and BV Nagarathna made this observation after noting that the Governor is yet to take a decision on the opinion furnished by the Election Commission on January 13, 2021.
The bench was hearing a writ petition filed by D D Thaisii, Congress MLA from Manipur, who sought for disqualification of these 12 MLAs on the ground that they were holding the posts of Parliamentary Secretaries, which amounted to “offices of profit”.
Background to the latest development:
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.