English हिन्दी
Connect with us

Latest Politics News

Supreme Court orders floor test for Yeddyurappa at 4 pm tomorrow

Published

on

Supreme Court orders floor test for Yeddyurappa at 4 pm tomorrow

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]The Supreme Court bench of Justices AK Sikri, SA Bobde and Ashok Bhushan on Friday, May 18, ordered a floor test in Karnataka Assembly to be held at 4 pm on Saturday, May 19, for BJP’s BS Yeddyurappa, who was sworn-in yesterday (Thursday, May 17) as Chief Minister, to prove his majority.

The court also overturned the nomination of an Anglo-Indian MLA to the Assembly by Karnataka Governor soon after Yeddyurappa took oath, even as the newly elected  were yet to take oath.

The court also ordered that Yeddyurappa cannot take any major decision before the floor test, the court said. The pro-tem Speaker will take decisions in accordance with the law on floor test.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]The court was hearing a petition filed by the post poll Congress-JD(S) combine against the decision of Governor Vajubhai Vala to invite the BJP to form a government and to nominate an Anglo-Indian member to the Assembly.

Yeddyurappa was sworn in as Karnataka chief minister yesterday (Thursday, May 17) by Governor Vajubhai Vala on grounds of being the leader of the single largest party despite a Congress-JD(S) post poll alliance claiming majority in the Assembly.

The Congress and JD(S) had meanwhile challenged Karnataka Governor’s decision to invite BJP leader BS Yeddyurappa to take oath as chief minister. At a dramatic pre-dawn hearing that started after 2 a.m. and went on till 5.40 a.m., the apex court, while refusing to stay the Governor’s order for Yeddyurappa’s swearing in, said it the hearing of the case would continue and fixed the next hearing for 10.30 a.m. for today, (Friday, May 18). It asked for the letters given by Yeddyurappa to the Governor on the basis of which he was invited to form government.

Yeddyurappa was sworn in just about four hours after the order and, soon after this, the Governor proceeded to nominate an Anglo-Indian to the state assembly. The Congress and JD(S) immediately moved the Supreme Court, for the second time within hours. The court addressed that question as well at the hearing today.

The court asked for the letters from Yeddyurappa to the Governor. Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for Yeddyurappa, handed over two letters.

In the first letter, dated May 15, Yeddyurappa had requested the Governor for permission to form government, claiming he had 104 MLAs and the support of others, although he had not mentioned any names.

He followed it up with another letter the following day, May 16, requesting for permission to form government as the leader of the single largest party.

SC asked on what grounds did the Governor decide that Yeddyurappa could provide a stable government when rather than the single largest party, the Congress and JD(S) had given a letter showing majority in the state assembly.

Rohatgi said Congress and JD(S) MLAs would also support Yeddyurappa. The Governor invited the leader of the single largest party as there was no pre-poll alliance, he added and claimed Yeddyurappa would prove his majority in a floor test.

“I do not wish to tell the names of other MLAs. They will vote as per conscience… no doubt will prove majority,” said Rohatgi. He said that at present he could not say anything beyond the fact that Congress and JD(S) MLAs would support Yeddyurappa, who had been invited to form government and whatever had to happen next would happen in the House.

Justice Sikri said the issue was precisely that.

The SC observed that floor test on Saturday was an option. Justice Sikri said, ” Ultimately this is a number game.” He added that, “An alternative is floor test and tomorrow itself. We don’t give time for anybody.”

“The issue has to be decided. Let us have the floor test and issue on question of law will be decided later here,” he observed.

Senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi of Congress said they were ready for the floor test tomorrow.

Justice Bhushan said arguments on the facts of the case would cause delay and it would be better if the floor test was held as soon as possible. That was the most practical solution. The court also assured security of all MLAs.

Arguing for Congress, Singhvi said Yeddyurappa has claimed in his letter that he has support of MLAs but had not taken names whereas the Congress had submitted a list of 117 MLAs along with their names to the Governor. Saying the Congress-JD(S) were ready for a floor test tomorrow, he said that the floor test be videographed and MLAs be provided complete security so that they could vote freely.

Rohatgi opposed a floor test on Saturday and, asking for more time, said it should be held on Monday.

The SC fixed the floor test for Saturday, 4 pm. It said no Anglo_indian be nominated to the Assembly before the floor test and ordered that Yeddyurappa would not take any policyy decision in the meantime.

It further directed the state Director General of Police to personally monitor security of MLAs. It said a pro-tem Speaker be appointed and he should administer the oath to all elected MLAs before 4pm and conduct the floor test.

After the order, Singhvi said it was “a great judgment”, adding, “10 weeks from now, the Supreme Court has also agreed to hear the larger constitutional case which asks if the governor can invite a party without majority.”

Former Chief Minister Siddaramaiah said the Governor’s conduct indicates that his decision is as per directions of Prime Minister Narendra Modi and BJP president Amit Shah. “Giving 15 days to prove majority is unprecedented in the history of independent India,” he says. “It shows his collusion with the BJP.”

Congress president Rahul Gandhi said, “The Supreme Court’s order on Karnataka floor test vindicates our stand that Governor acted unconstitutionally.”

Yeddyurappa said he is confident of proving his majority in the Assembly.

BJP’s Shobha Karandlaje said, “The party will abide by the Supreme Court order and “we are confident of winning the floor test tomorrow.” She added that many of the MLAs who do not want the JD(S)-Congress combination are in touch with them.

The Congress lawmakers will return from Hyderabad tonight or tomorrow morning, former Karnataka home minister Ramalinga Reddy told NDTV.

The Congress and the JD(S) in Karnataka had moved their MLAs from Bengaluru to Hyderabad, 569 km away, last night, “The central government was kind enough to refuse all permission for flights so taking the road,” former minister DK Shivakumar told NDTV during the overnight journey.

The Congress and JD(S) MLAs spent Thursday in two different hotels in Bengaluru. While the Congress flock was at Eagleton Resorts, the JD(S) leaders were at Shangrila Hotel. The move was aimed at preventing the BJP from luring them as soon as it became clear that Governor Vajubhai Vala was going to invite BS Yeddyurappa to form government.

The Congress-JD(S) combine responded by taking the battle to the Supreme Court that held a rare overnight hearing and took up the case again today at 10:30 this morning.

The three judges, Justices AK Sikri, SA Bobde and Ashok Bhushan, also brushed aside the argument by the central government’s top law officer KK Venugopal that the anti-defection law kicks in only after a legislator takes oath of office. This is preposterous, the bench shot back. The anti-defection law bans lawmakers from switching political parties.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

India News

INDIA bloc likely to meet on September 30 over Gyanesh Kumar row

INDIA bloc parties are likely to meet in New Delhi on September 30 amid growing opposition to Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar and the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls.

Published

on

Rahul-Gandhi

Opposition parties belonging to the INDIA bloc are set to meet in New Delhi on September 30 to discuss concerns surrounding the Election Commission, the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls and a proposed removal motion against Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar.

The proposed meeting comes amid growing coordination among opposition parties over the functioning of the poll panel and demands for action against Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar. The parties are also discussing a possible joint response to the developments.

Why is the INDIA bloc meeting being planned?

The INDIA bloc meeting on September 30 comes amid reports of objections within the Election Commission over certain decisions and orders related to the SIR exercise. 

According to the report, Opposition leaders have been discussing a coordinated response to their concerns over the Election Commission and the electoral-roll revision process. 

The issue is also expected to be discussed at the Congress Working Committee meeting scheduled for September 29, a day before the proposed INDIA bloc meeting.

Gyanesh Kumar removal demand in focus

The demand for the removal of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar has become a major point of contention between the Opposition and the Election Commission.

The CPI(M), CPI and CPI(ML)-Liberation have demanded Kumar’s removal and an immediate halt to the SIR exercise. Congress has also intensified its criticism of the CEC.

Opposition parties are also working on a fresh removal motion against Gyanesh Kumar. The September 30 meeting is expected to finalise the strategy for the motion, including the collection of signatures. According to the report, this would be the Opposition’s third such attempt. 

What is the SIR controversy?

The political dispute is linked to the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls, or SIR.

The controversy intensified following a report that Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi had recorded objections on several occasions concerning decisions and orders related to the SIR process.

The Election Commission has said that differing views and observations are part of normal deliberations in a multi-member constitutional body. The poll panel has also maintained that its orders have legal sanction and follow statutory procedures, while stating that the final decisions on the SIR were taken unanimously. 

TMC and Left parties coordinate over the issue

The developments have also brought the Trinamool Congress and the CPI(M) together on the Election Commission issue, despite their political differences in West Bengal.

CPI(M) general secretary M A Baby proposed an immediate meeting to discuss a joint strategy. According to the report, Mamata Banerjee spoke with M A Baby and Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi, after which the leaders settled on September 30 for the meeting. 

What could be discussed at the September 30 meeting?

The proposed meeting is expected to focus on:

  • Concerns surrounding the Election Commission
  • The Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls
  • Opposition demands concerning CEC Gyanesh Kumar
  • A possible fresh removal notice against the CEC
  • A coordinated response by INDIA bloc parties

The exact agenda and participation will depend on the discussions among the opposition parties before the proposed meeting.

Continue Reading

India News

Gandhi Parivar vs Sangh Parivar, Revanth Reddy’s remark sparks BJP attack

Telangana Chief Minister Revanth Reddy’s remarks contrasting the Gandhi Parivar with the Sangh Parivar triggered a BJP response accusing Congress of prioritising the Gandhi family.

Published

on

Telangana Chief Minister Revanth Reddy’s remarks comparing the Gandhi Parivar and Sangh Parivar have triggered a political exchange, with the BJP hitting back at the Congress leader.

Speaking in Kerala on Friday, Mr Reddy described the contest over India’s future as a fight between the two “parivars”. He said the Gandhi family had made sacrifices for the country while accusing the Sangh Parivar of attempting to divide India on the basis of religion, caste, region and language.

What Revanth Reddy said

Mr Reddy cited Mahatma Gandhi, Indira Gandhi and Rajiv Gandhi while speaking about what he described as sacrifices made by the Gandhi family.

He also referred to Sonia Gandhi, Rahul Gandhi and Priyanka Gandhi, saying they had given up positions, power and high office.

The Telangana Chief Minister said he had no remaining personal political ambitions and described his objective as working towards a Congress-led government at the Centre with Rahul Gandhi as Prime Minister.

Mr Reddy also appealed to people to stand with the Gandhi Parivar and oppose the Sangh Parivar. He described the latter as a threat to India’s democracy.

BJP hits back

The BJP responded to Mr Reddy’s remarks on Saturday.

BJP spokesperson Pradeep Bhandari said the Telangana Chief Minister’s comments amounted to an admission that Congress’s objective was to bring the Gandhi family back to power.

He also linked Mr Reddy’s remarks to the ongoing political debate around “vote chori”, the Election Commission, the Constitution and democracy, arguing that the Congress’s focus was instead on the Gandhi family.

The exchange adds to the political confrontation between the BJP and Congress, with Mr Reddy presenting the Gandhi Parivar and Sangh Parivar as opposing forces in India’s political future, while the BJP has interpreted his remarks as evidence of Congress’s focus on the Gandhi family.

Continue Reading

India News

Veeramani POCSO case: Vijay questions Stalin over earlier probe

Tamil Nadu Chief Minister Vijay has questioned MK Stalin over the handling of the Veeramani POCSO case, while Stalin has rejected allegations that the previous DMK government protected anyone.

Published

on

Actor Vijay

Tamil Nadu Chief Minister and Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK) president C Joseph Vijay has questioned DMK president MK Stalin over the handling of the POCSO case involving Gem Granites founder R Veeramani. The political exchange follows renewed investigation into allegations involving minor girls.

Vijay’s remarks came as the ruling TVK stepped up its questions about how the case was handled during the previous DMK government. The party’s IT wing has alleged that the earlier investigation was weakened and questioned why a final report was filed.

The allegations have been rejected by the DMK. Stalin has said that no order was issued by the DMK government to protect anyone in the case and has called the allegations false and defamatory.

What did Vijay say about the Veeramani case?

Vijay questioned Stalin over the handling of the case and demanded an explanation from the former chief minister.

The TVK has specifically questioned why action was not taken against Veeramani during the previous administration and why the earlier investigation resulted in a closure report.

The party has also raised questions about the role of officials involved in the earlier investigation. These are political allegations made by the TVK and have not been established as facts.

What is the Veeramani POCSO case?

The case concerns allegations of sexual abuse of minors involving R Veeramani, the founder of Gem Granites.

The case came under renewed scrutiny after a special POCSO court rejected an earlier closure report and ordered further investigation. The expanded probe has subsequently identified additional alleged survivors who were minors at the time of the alleged offences, according to current reporting.

The investigation is also examining the circumstances surrounding the earlier probe and whether there were any lapses in how the case was handled.

What has MK Stalin said?

Stalin has rejected allegations that the previous DMK government protected Veeramani.

He has said that no order was issued by the DMK government to shield anyone in the case. Stalin has also said that everyone responsible for the alleged offences, including anyone who aided or attempted to protect the accused, should face the law.

The DMK president has further said that the focus should remain on securing justice for the affected girls rather than making political allegations.

Why has the case become a political issue?

The Veeramani case has become the subject of a political dispute between the ruling TVK and the DMK over the handling of the earlier investigation.

The TVK is questioning the previous government’s handling of the case, while the DMK has denied that it intervened to protect the accused.

At this stage, claims about political interference or deliberate weakening of the earlier investigation should be treated as allegations unless established by the ongoing investigation or judicial proceedings.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com