High Court quashes President’s Rule in Uttarakhand

In a huge political embarrassment to the Centre and the BJP, the Uttarakhand high court on Thursday struck down President’s Rule in the state, imposed on March 27. Observing that the “proclamation of March 27 stands quashed”, the Uttarakhand high court also directed reinstated Congress chief minister Harish Rawat to prove his majority in the House on April 29.

While the Centre is to move the Supreme Court against the order on Friday, the high court decision has come as a major setback to both the Centre and the ruling BJP, which had openly been backing the rebel MLAs against the state’s Congress chief minister, Mr Harish Rawat. The Centre also intends to challenge the disqualification of the nine rebel Congress MLAs in the Supreme Court.

In an indication that the coming Parliament Session would be stormy, Congress on Thursday gave a notice to Rajya Sabha Chairman Hamid Ansari seeking passage of a resolution condemning the Modi government for “destabilistion” of the Uttarakhand government and imposition of President’s Rule in the state. The BJP-led NDA government is in a minority in the Upper House.

After the court’s order, BJP president Amit Shah and senior ministers went into a huddle and decided that the government would move the Supreme Court on Friday challenging the judgment quashing the proclamation of President’s Rule.

While BJP leaders and spokespersons were struggling to put up a brave front, celebrations broke out at Congress headquarters and outside CM Harish Rawat’s residence in Dehradun. Appearing humble, Mr Rawat said that “instead of celebrating, we need to focus on development”. Adopting a conciliatory tone, Mr Rawat also urged the Centre to pursue the path of “cooperative federalism and let the state government work”. Then came his sting: “Woh mahabali hain, woh log shaktishali hain, woh chaure seene wale hain (They are powerful and have broad chests)... how can I fight them... I request them to let us work.” Mr Rawat said.

Uttarakhand Speaker Govind Singh Kunjwal termed the high court’s decision as “historic” and said it was a “slap” in the Centre’s face for trying to dislodge an elected government.

He said the “effective strength” of the House was now 62 as the high court had upheld the disqualification of the nine rebel Congress MLAs.

“The soul of the matter is whether it is open to the Central government to get rid of state governments, supplant or uproot the democratically-elected government, introduce chaos, undermine confidence of the little man who stands with a white paper to cast his vote, braving the snow, heat and rain,” the high court bench said. “We are of the view that be it suspension or dissolution, the effect is toppling of a democratically-elected government. It breeds cynicism in the hearts of citizens who participate in the democratic system and also undermines democracy and the foundation of federalism,” the bench said.

The bench, dictating the judgment in open court for nearly 150 minutes, said what was at stake here was democracy at large. It observed that the issue must be seen here on a larger canvas as India is a union of states with the Centre and states both sovereign in their respective spheres.

The HC, which had been breathing fire against the Centre for the past few days, continued to be fierce in its observations on Thursday, saying that President’s Rule “should be used as a matter of last resort”. BJP national general secretary Kailash Vijayvargiya claimed the “BJP is ready for the floor test”. The division bench of the high court, headed by Chief Justice K.M. Joseph, said the imposition of Central Rule was contrary to the law laid down by the Supreme Court. The bench also observed that the material considered (read sting CD) for imposing President’s Rule “has been found wanting”. Upholding the disqualification of nine dissident Congress MLAs, the court said they have to pay the price of committing the “constitutional sin” of defection by being disqualified.

The court turned down an oral plea made by the Centre’s counsel for a stay on its judgment to move the Supreme Court against it. “We won’t stay our own judgment. You can go to the Supreme Court and get a stay,” it said. “There is no President’s Rule now. The government has revived. We had told you to give us time (to write the verdict). But you forced us to pronounce it today. We had said we will not allow (ourselves) to be taken for a ride. We have no objection to being overruled,” the bench said.

Earlier the court, in severe criticism of the Centre’s move to impose President’s Rule, had lashed out, saying the proclamation under Article 356, just a day ahead of the floor test, amounted to cutting at the roots of democracy. It had observed that the government was introducing “chaos and undermining an elected government”. On Wednesday, it had maintained the “decision to impose President’s Rule was subject to judicial review as even the President can go terribly wrong”. Only a few weeks ago, Union finance minister Arun Jaitley had justified the imposition of President’s Rule, saying there was “no better evidence of a breakdown of the Constitution than this”. He had claimed the Congress government of Uttarakhand was “murdering democracy every day from March 18 till March 27”. The Uttarakhand HC had said, “It would be a travesty of justice if the Centre recalls its order imposing President’s Rule and allows someone else to form a government now.”

The court told the Centre that it could allow ousted CM Harish Rawat’s petition challenging the imposition of President’s Rule and ensure that a floor test is held. “Should we consider their application for stay moved on April 7 It was expected that till the judgment is pronounced, Central government will not recall (Article) 356. If you recall 356 and call someone else to form a government, what else would it be other than travesty of justice,” the bench said. The court lashed out after the Centre’s counsel said he was not in a position to give an assurance that the government would consider putting on hold the recall of its order imposing President’s Rule for a week. It gave the government’s counsel some time to take instructions. The bench then observed, “Otherwise you can do this in every state. Impose President’s Rule for 10-15 days and then ask someone else to take oath. More than angry, we are pained that you are behaving like this. That the highest authority — Government of India — behaves like this. How can you think of playing with the court ”