English हिन्दी
Connect with us

Latest Politics News

Yeddyurappa to take oath as CM, SC refuses to stay Governor’s decision

Published

on

Yeddyurappa to take oath as CM, SC refuses to stay Governor’s decision

As expected, BJP’s Karnataka chief ministerial candidate BS Yeddyurappa will take oath at 9 am on Thursday, May 17, just as he had claimed.

This was decided after a dramatic hearing at Supreme Court in the early hours of Thursday when the Congress challenged Karnataka Governor’s decision to invite BJP leader BS Yeddyurappa to take oath as chief minister later that day –at 9 am on Thursday, May 17.

The apex court, while refusing to stay the Governor’s order for Yeddyurappa’s swearing in, said the hearing of the case would continue and fixed the next hearing for 10.30 a.m. on Friday, May 18. It also asked for the list of MLAs supporting Yeddyurappa to be produced that day.

After Yeddyurappa’s claim that he would take oath as chief minister on May 17 was confirmed by Karnataka Governor VajubhaiVala’sinvitation to him to take oath as CM at 9 am that day, with only the night remaining for making their move, the Congress and JD(S)moved the Supreme Court.

A three-judge benchcomprising ofJustice AK Sikri, Justice Sharad Arvind Bobde, Justice Ashok Bhushan heard the case. Notably, the bench did not include the Chief Justice of India (CJI) Dipak Misra or any of the next senior four judges who had gone public with their complaint against him with complaints that included allocation of cases.

Former attorney general Mukul Rohatgi appeared for the BJP, Additional Solicitor General Tushar Mehta represented the Centre while Abhishek Manu Singhvi argued for the Congress.

Rohatgi said the Governor could not be stopped from taking a decision, that the court could not stop him from having a government sworn in.

Singhvi enumerating numbers said the Congress and JD(S) had informed the Governor on May 15 about their alliance. The BJP does not have a majority.

As Attorney General KK Venugopal also arrived for the hearing, Singhvi said as per the recommendations of the Sarkaria Commission …

The court interjected to say “…the single largest party is invited…”

Singhvi said, “No… the alliance hving a majority is invited.”

“The Supreme Court approved this decision in the case of Goa,” he said.

He pointed out that whereas in the case of Goa, Jharkhand and Jagdambika Pal, the SC brought down the 7-day time for floor test to prove majority to 48 hours, the Karnataka Governor has given a time of 15 days.

Singhvi said while BJP’s chief minister-designate had asked for seven days, the Governor has given him 15 days.

Giving so much time is allowing chance for the Constitutional sin of horsetrading.

Justice AK Sikri said the single largest party has been invited to form government and it claims it would prove its majority, and you are arguing that they do not have anyone else’s support.

Singhvi said the BJP has 104 MLAs and unless eight MLAs from Congress break away to back BJP, they cannot get a majority.

The court said: “But the defection of MLAs is against the law.”

Singhvi: “That is exactly what I’m saying.”

Justice SA Bobde said that if the court stayed the Governor’s order, no government would be formed. Under Article 361, the Governor has certain special powers, said Justice Bobde.

Singhvi, cited the example of Meghalaya, Manipur and Goa, where Congress was the largest party short of majority and the first chance to form a government was given to a post-poll alliance, in Delhi AamAadmi Party was given a chance to form government with Congress support when BJP was biggest single party, and in Jharkhand JMM-Congress got a chance even when BJP had more seats.

Justice Sikri said the Governor had used his discretion and how could the court interfere with this power.

Singhvi countered, saying that the decision to hold swearing in by tomorrow morning (actually just 5-6 hours later) was extremely problematic and the SC could not be a mute spectator to it.

He said the plea for staying the swearing in was not to check the Governor but to check Yeddyurappa. The Governor, he argued, had not given any reasons for his decision (to invite the BJP leader to take oath despite lacking majority).

Singhvi also argued that the Governor’s decision was open to judicial review.

As he concluded his arguments, Attorney General KK Venugopal, arguing on behalf of the Centre, said it wasn’t a question of legality nor was it known what facts the Governor took into consideration – that the entire case was based on conjectures.

Singhvi said the court should postpone the oath taking for two days and hear the case in detail.

Mukul Rohatgi chimed in to argue that the court should not have heard the case at all, that too so late at night, that such hearing was held only for Yakub Memon(the terrorist, Mumbai bomb blast accused) case.

NDTV reported that Justice Sikri said the court had not seen any letter from BJP to the Governor staking its claim so how could it take a position on BJP’s claim.

A curious argument from the AG was that if a person elected as MLA on one party’s ticket switched sides to another before taking oath, it could not be treated as defection.

Rohatgi argued that if the court deemed it necessary, Yeddyurappa could be removed from chief ministership, but how could the court stay Governor’s decision? He said the only question left was how many days should be allowed for the floor test. “Is this such an important/urgent question that has to be decided at four in the morning?” Rohatgi asked.

The SC bench finally decided not to interfere with the Governor’s decision to hold Yeddyurappa’s swearing-in ceremony, saying a final decision about whether one retains the post or not would come when the case was decided and there could be no interim order in this regard.

India News

PM Modi skips Lok Sabha reply as protests force repeated adjournments

PM Modi did not deliver his Lok Sabha reply today after sustained Opposition protests led to repeated adjournments over a dispute involving Rahul Gandhi’s proposed speech.

Published

on

PM Modi

Prime Minister Narendra Modi did not deliver his scheduled reply to the Motion of Thanks on the President’s address in the Lok Sabha today after sustained Opposition protests led to multiple adjournments of the House.

The disruption followed an escalation of tensions linked to Congress leader Rahul Gandhi’s proposed speech and the suspension of eight Opposition MPs a day earlier. The situation worsened after remarks made by BJP MP Nishikant Dubey during the proceedings.

Dispute over references to books sparks fresh ruckus

The controversy intensified when Nishikant Dubey responded to Rahul Gandhi’s demand to speak on national security and references to the unpublished memoirs of former Army chief General MM Naravane. Dubey said that while Gandhi wanted to quote from an unpublished book, he himself had brought several books that, according to him, made claims about the Gandhi family.

As Dubey began listing these books and their contents, strong protests erupted from Opposition members. Krishna Prasad Tenneti, who was presiding over the House at the time, cited Rule 349, which restricts members from reading out books, newspapers, or letters unless directly related to parliamentary business. Despite repeated warnings, the matter remained unresolved, leading to another adjournment.

Rahul Gandhi accuses government of silencing debate

Earlier in the day, Rahul Gandhi alleged that he was being prevented from speaking on an issue of national importance. He claimed the government was uncomfortable with references to General Naravane’s memoirs, which he said discussed the handling of the 2020 China border crisis.

In a social media post, Gandhi said he intended to present the Prime Minister with a book authored by the former Army chief, adding that some cabinet ministers had even questioned the existence of the book. He also wrote to Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla after the suspension of eight Opposition MPs, alleging that parliamentary debate was being curtailed.

After it became clear that the Prime Minister would not speak in the House today, Gandhi posted that PM Modi had avoided Parliament because he was “scared” to face the truth. Congress MP Priyanka Gandhi Vadra echoed the allegation, claiming the Prime Minister was unwilling to enter the House.

Proceedings disrupted throughout the day

Lok Sabha proceedings were first adjourned until 2 pm amid loud protests over the issue linked to Naravane’s memoirs. Even after the House reconvened, disruptions continued, preventing normal business from resuming.

Later, Congress MPs staged a demonstration outside the Parliament complex, demanding that Rahul Gandhi be allowed to speak on the President’s address.

Continue Reading

India News

President’s Rule revoked in Manipur as NDA set to form new government

President’s Rule has been withdrawn in Manipur nearly a year after its imposition, paving the way for a new NDA-led government under Yumnam Khemchand Singh.

Published

on

President rule invoked in Manipur

President’s Rule has been revoked in Manipur nearly a year after it was imposed, clearing the way for the formation of a new government led by the BJP-led National Democratic Alliance (NDA). The decision came hours before the scheduled oath ceremony of the new council of ministers.

Chief minister-designate Yumnam Khemchand Singh is set to take oath later this evening, along with other NDA legislators who will formally join the new government. The revocation brings an end to central rule that had been in place since February 2025, following the resignation of then chief minister N Biren Singh.

Assembly status during central rule

During the period of President’s Rule, the Manipur Legislative Assembly remained in suspended animation, meaning it was neither functioning nor dissolved. With the restoration of the elected government, legislative activity is expected to resume.

Khemchand Singh, 61, belongs to the Meitei community. Two deputy chief ministers have been named to reflect Manipur’s ethnic diversity. Nemcha Kipgen, from the Kuki community, and Losii Dikho, from the Naga community, are set to take charge as deputy chief ministers.

According to people with direct knowledge of the matter, Nemcha Kipgen is likely to take oath from a Manipur government guesthouse in Delhi.

Key portfolios and leadership choices

Seven-time MLA from Bishnupur district, Govindas Konthoujam, said he has been entrusted with the Home portfolio. Emphasising stability and law and order, he said he remains committed to serving the state with discipline and restraint.

Sources said Khemchand Singh is viewed within the party as a non-polarising leader who is acceptable across internal factions at a time of political transition. While he is yet to be tested in governance, he is seen as a steady administrative choice capable of providing organisational discipline and continuity amid uncertainty.

Uneasy peace continues in Manipur

The formation of the new government comes against the backdrop of continued tension in Manipur, nearly three years after violence erupted between the Meitei community in the valley areas and the Kuki tribes in several hill districts.

A section of Kuki groups has been demanding a separate administrative arrangement, with negotiations involving multiple insurgent groups operating under two umbrella organisations that are signatories to the suspension of operations agreement.

In recent weeks, some Kuki civil society organisations have stated they would not participate in the Manipur government and have distanced themselves from Kuki MLAs expected to join the new administration.

A day before the announcement of the new government, Kuki leader Paolienlal Haokip posted on X that representatives of the Kuki Zo people could not take part in leadership selection without justice and a written commitment for political settlement.

Diverging demands from communities

Meitei civil society groups have maintained that all internally displaced persons should be allowed to return home safely, even as dialogue continues. However, Kuki leaders have insisted that a political solution in the form of a separate administration must come first, before discussions on rehabilitation and return from relief camps.

Meitei leaders have countered this position, arguing that the demand reflects an ethnocentric territorial claim and that humanitarian issues should be addressed alongside negotiations, as no area is exclusively inhabited by a single community.

Continue Reading

India News

Mamata Banerjee alleges mass voter deletions in Bengal, targets Election Commission

Mamata Banerjee has accused the Election Commission of deleting thousands of voter names without due process, raising questions over the timing of the exercise ahead of elections.

Published

on

Mamata Banerjee

West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee on Monday intensified her attack on the Election Commission over voter roll revisions, alleging that a large number of names have been deleted without due process as the state heads towards elections.

Addressing party workers, Banerjee claimed that 40,000 voters’ names were removed from her constituency alone, alleging that the deletions were carried out unilaterally and without giving voters a chance to be heard.

“In my constituency they have deleted 40,000 voters’ names unilaterally… Even a murderer gets a chance to defend himself,” she said.

Allegations against election officials

The chief minister directly accused an election official, alleging political bias and irregular conduct in the revision process. She claimed that voter names were being removed while officials sat in Election Commission offices, calling the process illegal.

“They cannot do it, it is illegal. 58 lakh names have been unilaterally deleted,” she said, echoing claims earlier made by Trinamool Congress leader Abhishek Banerjee.

Banerjee also alleged that individuals described as “micro-observers” had been appointed illegally, claiming they had no role under the Representation of the People Act and were linked to the BJP.

‘Alive but marked dead’

In a dramatic moment during her address, the chief minister asked those present who had been marked as deceased in the voter lists to raise their hands.

“See, they are alive but as per the Election Commission they are dead,” she said.

She further alleged that names were being deleted under the category of “logical discrepancy,” adding that even noted economist and Nobel laureate Amartya Sen had earlier been questioned regarding the age of his mother.

Questions over timing of voter roll exercise

While stating that she did not oppose the Special Intensive Revision process in principle, Banerjee questioned the timing of the exercise.

“I have no problem with SIR, but why do it on the eve of elections? Why not after elections?” she asked.

Reiterating confidence in her party’s organisational strength, the chief minister said she was prepared to fight the issue politically and democratically.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com