[dropcap color=”#008040″ boxed=”yes” boxed_radius=”8px” class=”” id=””]T[/dropcap]he Supreme Court will go through the Governor’s report recommending imposition of President’s rule in Arunachal Pradesh before deciding on the legality of the Centre’s decision to rule state from Delhi. The SC heard the Congress plea on Wednesday and issued notice to the Centre to produce the Governor’s report while fixing the next date of hearing on February 1.
In his report, Arunachal Governor Rajkhowa reportedly claimed that law and order situation had collapsed in the state and the assembly session had not been held in six months. He also pointed out that legislators had been denied access to the Assembly by the supporters of the outgoing chief minister. .
While the state governor’s council agreed to share the report with the centre, he said the same cannot be shared with the Congress. The court refused to agree to this and said it will first go through the report and then decide on it.
[dropcap color=”#008040″ boxed=”yes” boxed_radius=”8px” class=”” id=””]T[/dropcap]he apex court constitution bench comprising Justice Jagdish Singh Khehar, Justice Dipak Misra, Justice Madan B. Lokur, Justice Pinaki Chandra Ghosh and Justice N.V. Ramana issued the notice giving the Centre time till January 29 to file its response and the Governor report.
The court also gave liberty to petitioner Congress chief whip in Arunachal Pradesh Rajesh Tacho to amend the plea to include challenge to the presidential proclamation.
The Congress on Monday had moved the Supreme Court challenging the cabinet decision to impose President’s Rule in Arunachal Pradesh based on the recommendation of state Governor Jyoti Prasad Rajkhowa.
The union Cabinet on Sunday decided to impose President’s Rule in Arunachal Pradesh.
The petition moved by Tacho has assailed the report of Governor Rajkhowa for imposition of President’s Rule and its acceptance by the union Cabinet and subsequent recommendation to the President.
The Governor’s report holds the key to decide the legality for imposition of the President’s rule in Arunachal Pradesh.
Describing the Arunachal Pradesh crisis as “too sensitive” and a matter of “gravity”, the court insisted that it would examine the Governor report described as “confidential”.
When the state governor’s council said it would take time to submit the report in the court, the judges said: “You have given this report indicating an emergency situation as to why President’s Rule needs to be imposed. So please produce the report.”
[dropcap color=”#008040″ boxed=”yes” boxed_radius=”8px” class=”” id=””]R[/dropcap]ebellion in Congress had triggered the political crisis in Arunachal Pradesh after its 21 MLAs, up in arms against the then Chief Minister Nabam Tuki, joined hands with 11 of BJP and two independents to ‘impeach’ the then Assembly Speaker Nabam Rebia at a makeshift venue, a move branded as “illegal and unconstitutional” by the Speaker.
Twenty-seven MLAs in the 60-member Assembly, including Tuki and his ministers boycotted the proceedings. The rebels later “elected” dissident Congressman Kalikho Pul as the new “chief minister” of the state. However, the Speaker had not recognized the assembly session as valid.