Our Correspondent
The Supreme Court today stayed Uttrakhand High Court’s verdict till April 27 on revoking president rule in the state. The apex court wanted more time to review the order.
Before passing a brief order this afternoon, a bench comprising Justices Dipak Misra and Shiva Kirti Singh recorded an undertaking given by Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi that the Centre shall not revoke the Presidential proclamation till the next date of hearing.
The apex court clarified that it was keeping in abeyance the judgement of the High Court till the next date of hearing on April 27 as a measure of balance for both the parties as the copy of the verdict was not made available to the parties.
While listing the matter for hearing on Wednesday, the bench said that the High Court shall provide the judgement passed yesterday to the parties by April 26 and on the same date the copy of the verdict shall also be placed before the apex court.
The Supreme Court’s stay has the effect of undoing the revival of the Congress government led by Harish Rawat by the High Court judgement yesterday.
The apex court issued notice to Harish Rawat and Chief Secretary of the state on the petition by Centre challenging the quashing of Presidential proclamation under Article 356 of the Constitution in the state.
The apex court order came after the Centre today moved the Court against the Uttarakhand High Court verdict quashing President’s rule in the state.
Earlier Centre today moved the Supreme Court against the Uttarakhand High Court verdict quashing President’s rule in the state.
Earlier the AG said, there was a need for an urgent hearing in view of the apparent problem likely to occur between today and Monday. Meanwhile, nine rebel Congress MLAs also filed an appeal in the Supreme Court against Uttarakhand High Court’s decision barring them from participating in floor test on the 29th of this month.
The Centre says that Mr Rawat heads a minority government and cannot remain in office. As evidence, it claims that last month, when Mr Rawat presented the state’s budget, nine Congressmen voted against it.
The Centre says that the budget was therefore wrongly declared as cleared, when, in fact, most legislators had rejected it. The Congress disagrees.
