Supreme Court orders President's Rule back in Uttarakhand till April 27

The Attorney General gave an undertaking that Centre would not revoke Presidential proclamation till next date of hearing.

The Supreme Court on Friday stayed till April 27 the judgement of Uttarakhand High Court quashing the imposition of President's Rule in the state, giving a new turn to the continuing political drama by restoring central rule.

Before passing the order, a bench comprising Justices Dipak Misra and Shiva Kirti Singh recorded an undertaking given by Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi that the "Union of India 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 April 27, the bench said that the High Court shall provide the judgement passed on Thursday 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 high-voltage hearing at 3.30 pm started with the Attorney General attacking Rawat assuming the office as Chief Minister and chairing a cabinet meeting when the copy of the judgement passed on Thursday was not made available to parties.

“How can the judgement be implemented unless you have the copy of it. It can't deny a party to file an appeal. I see on TV that the respondent (Rawat) says he has been resurrected as the Chief Minister and late in the night calls for cabinet meeting. How can you say that the government has been resurrected ”

"In the absence of the copy of the judgement the other party cannot go to appeal. The idea is not that you steal a march," Rohatgi said while seeking a stay of the high court judgement quashing the imposition of President's Rule in Uttarakhand and restoring the dismissed Congress government.

When the bench asked the Attorney General as to when the hearing on the appeal can take place, he said the judgement has to be signed as a signed judgement cannot be altered. "Today we find that in the absence of the signed judgement, somebody is acting in his office which is not appropriate."

"If the judgement is subject to appeal, it cannot be allowed to be implemented. It cannot be subjected to the advantage of some and disadvantage of others," he submitted assailing the quashing of the March 27 notification on proclamation of President's rule and the granting of status quo ante by the High Court.

He said the Presidential proclamation was based on the Union Cabinet's note which has considered the apex court's S R Bommai judgement which has dealt in great length with the issue of Article 356 and the floor test.

Rohatgi referred to the March 18 incident when during the presentation and passing of the Appropriation Bill, the Rawat government was reduced to minority with nine Congress MLAs turning rebel and joining hands with 27 BJP MLAs in demanding vote by division which was not allowed by the Speaker and those 35 MLAs complained to the Governor.

"Something was brewing," he said, adding that "if the voting by division was allowed to have taken place, the Rawat government would have fallen on March 18 itself. So, if the money bill falls, the government would have fallen and the majority government would have become minority."

Responding to the order, ousted Chief Minister Harish Rawat said, "We will follow Supreme Court's judgement with due respect."

He further said, "This order is interim, till April 27, because the top court didn't have High Court's judgement copy."

Earlier in the day, Centre moved the top court challenging the high court's verdict. Rohatgi mentioned the appeal before a bench comprising Justices Dipak Misra and Shiva Kirti Singh, which asked him to approach the Registry for listing it for hearing today itself.

The bench said that the Registry will seek permission from Chief Justice of India (CJI) T S Thakur for listing of the appeal before an appropriate bench.

At the outset, the AG said that the Special Leave Petition (SLP) has been filed today morning but "we don't have the copy of the judgement" as it was not declared and only a speaking order was passed.

A bench headed by Justice Misra was sitting in the CJI's court as the CJI was at a scheduled conference of High Court Chief Justices and judges in the national capital.

Justice Misra said in view of the non-availability of the CJI, some arrangement has to be done for its listing. The AG said there was a need for an urgent hearing in view of the apparent problem likely to occur between today and Monday. "I want to press for the stay today itself," Rohatgi said.

A petition was also filed by nine Congress rebel MLAs who were disqualified by the Speaker and they have challenged the HC verdict keeping them away from participating in the floor test scheduled for April 29.

The AG, who was flanked by Additional Solicitors General (ASG) Maninder Singh and Tushar Mehta and senior advocate Harish Salve who had appeared for Uttarakhand in the HC, said an SLP has been filed today morning challenging the verdict of the HC pronounced yesterday by which President's proclamation under Article 356 has been quashed.

Senior advocates Kapil Sibal, Abhishek Manu Singhvi and Vivek Tankha were present on behalf of the Congress party.

Coming down heavily on the Centre for the March 27 proclamation under Art 356, the High Court had on Thursday quashed the imposition of President's rule in Uttarakhand and restored the dismissed Congress government while castigating the Centre for uprooting a democratically-elected government.

The HC had said the imposition of President's rule was contrary to the law laid down by the Supreme Court.

Directing revival of the Harish Rawat government, which was dismissed by the Centre on March 27, the High Court had ordered that he should seek a vote of confidence in the Assembly on April 29.