Government

Legitimacy of President’s Decision can be Subject to Judicial Review: Uttarakhand HC

The court made this observation after senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi raised the apprehension that President’s Rule might be revoked before a verdict was pronounced or even reserved. .

Credit:PTI

Credit:PTI

Nainital: The Uttarakhand High Court on April 20 issued a veiled warning to the Centre hoping it will not provoke the court by revoking the President’s Rule imposed in the state till a verdict was delivered on the petition challenging its imposition.

Earlier in the day, the court had observed that the legitimacy of the President’s decision to suspend the Assembly was subject to judicial review because even he could go wrong.

“We hope they will not provoke us,” a bench of Chief Justice K M Joseph and Justice V K Bist said after senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi raised the apprehension that President’s Rule might be revoked before verdict was pronounced or even reserved.

Singhvi, who appeared for former Chief Minister Harish Rawat in his plea challenging President’s Rule, expressed fear after the Centre said that the Attorney General’s statement of April 7, that nothing with regard to 356 will be done till April 17, had “expired”.

Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Tushar Mehta did not confirm whether any decision with regard to revocation of President’s Rule has been taken by the Centre.

Singhvi said President Rule should not be lifted before judgement was reserved or pronounced and the “opposition” should not be invited to form a government as this would render the plea infructuous.

He also said that the Centre could not resort to such tactics to force the court to deliver a verdict quickly.

(PTI)