SC declines to entertain Sangma's plea against prez

Sangma had challenged the election of Pranab Mukherjee as president

PTI | December 5, 2012



The Supreme Court on Wednesday dismissed by a majority ruling former Lok Sabha Speaker P A Sangma's petition challenging the election of senior Congress leader Pranab Mukherjee as President.

Chief Justice Altamas Kabir, who led the 3 to 2 majority ruling, held that Sangma's petition is not maintainable for regular hearing.

The dissenting judges held that the petition deserves regular hearing with one of them noting it was alleged that Mukherjee was holding an office of profit when he filed his nomination papers.

"The election petition is not maintainable for regular hearing. It is dismissed," the Chief Justice pronounced the verdict on behalf of him and justices P Sathasivam and S S Nijjar.

The two dissenting orders were pronounced separately by justices J Chelameswar and Ranjan Gogoi.

Justice Chelameswar, who read out the operative portion of his order dissenting with the order read out by the CJI, said he will give the reasons for dissenting with majority order shortly next week.

Justice Gogoi said since it was alleged that Mukherjee was holding the office of profit as the Chairman of the Indian Statistical Institute (ISI), he is of the view that the election petition filed by Sangma was fit to deserve regular hearing.

Earlier, the court had taken on record the short affidavit of Mukherjee, who said the grounds for challenging his election was "ex facie misconceived."

Sangma has contended that Mukherjee was holding offices of profit as chairman ISI, Kolkata and as also the leader of the Congress Party in Lok Sabha when he had entered the Presidential race.

Earlier, the Attorney General had opposed the plea of Sangma on the issue of office of profit.

"An office of profit is an office which must be under the Government, which enjoys the power to appoint and remove and some salary or emoluments must be attached to the post," Vahanvati said, adding that this was not the case with the post of Chairperson of Indian Statistical Institute (ISI).

"No pecuniary benefits was attached to the post of Chairman of ISI.. Moreover, the post must be such where the office-bearers can be influenced by the appointing authority," the law officer, who is assisting the court, said.

Comments

 

Other News

Gandhian movement after Gandhi failed: Ram Guha

The Gandhian movement in India, after Gandhi’s death, failed, says Ramachandra Guha, and blames Vinoba Bhave for it. But the movement found new, fertile grounds around the world and succeeded in bringing about a change in South Africa, the US and elsewhere. It is high time it returned home. Of cour

When religion, politics and Bollywood come together

Tavleen Singh, noted journalist and political commentator, has turned to fiction, with her debut novel ‘The Actor’ (HaperCollins India). Set in the near future, it has a superstar, Amit Singh, turning to politics, when the political landscape is dominated by prime minister Guru Gaynendraj

Cabinet approves setting up of Integrated Transport & Logistics Authority

The union cabinet, chaired by prime minister Narendra Modi, on Tuesday approved the setting up of a Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV), called Integrated Transport & Logistics Authority (ITLA), to strengthen research, planning, appraisal, monitoring and impact assessment within the broad domains of Transp

Why foundational literacy and numeracy is key to school education

Foundational Literacy and Numeracy (FLN) are often described as the building blocks of education. Yet, their significance goes well beyond a child’s ability to read a sentence, write a response or solve a basic mathematical problem. These foundational skills shape how children understand the world,

When police data becomes the algorithm

For decades, policing has followed a familiar sequence: a crime occurs, the police respond, an investigation produces records and those records become part of the institutional memory of the criminal justice system. Artificial intelligence is beginning to alter that sequence. Instead of merely recording

Before India voted, the framers worried about the referee

“We are making a Constitution forever and not only for today.” Shibban Lal Saksena said this in the Constituent Assembly on June 15, 1949. He was warning that a ruling party might one day choose a loyalist to run India’s elections. Seventy-seven years later, the Supreme Court is wrestli

Upcoming Conferences



-->

Archives

Current Issue

Opinion

Facebook Twitter Google Plus Linkedin Subscribe Newsletter

Twitter