President's Rule in Uttarakhand to continue, rules Apex Court

Opponents contend the rule change would vastly expand the ability of the FBI to hack into computer networks

However, the brief order by the apex court came after it took an undertaking from the Centre that it will not revoke the President's rule, which has been restored by today's order.

The bench made it clear that it was extending the stay on the High Court verdict till further orders on the consent of parties.

Rohatgi replied that if the President was expected to keep mum when a State Chief Minister was shown on TV openly horse-trading. "We believe in guarding the Constitution", she said.

At the outset, the bench asked the Attorney General to look into the suggestions advanced by senior advocate K K Venugopal, who has been appointed as an amicus curiae, on the issue. It also cancelled the floor test in the state assembly scheduled for Friday.

In February 2014, Kumar had moved the apex court with the same prayer when it had disposed of the matter directing the Centre to respond to his suggestion within six months. There cannot be an assumption that there was horse-trading and make it a ground to impose President's Rule in order to short-circuit the floor test, he said, adding that misgovernance, corruption or the Speaker's conduct/decision in the Assembly could not be a ground to impose President's Rule.

"What is the stage of appropriation bill & when President rule comes in the picture with regards to Appropriation bill?" Of course, the government has cited this as a cause for the breakdown of the constitutional machinery, leading to invocation of Article 356.

You don't revoke President's rule just like that. He also said the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) should stop threatening them as they are right.

The Uttarakhand assembly passed the Appropriation Bill through voice vote despite protests by the rebels.

"We respect the judgement of courts".

"Speaker is the master of the house".

"He has to be guided by procedures", Rohatgi said.

The Bench, as reported by The Hindu, questioned Governor K.K. Paul's authority to seek video and audio recording of the 18 March assembly proceedings on the passing of the Money Bill.

Vasanthakumar has now approached the apex court again seeking quashing of this decision of the central government. Rawat immediately went to court. "Even if we sustain the President's Rule, there has to be a floor test", the bench told the government.

"What will the Governor do?"

"A sting operation can be socially, idealistically and morally condemned". Was it not horse trading?

March 30: High Court stays floor test.

While hearing the Centre's petition challenging the Uttarakhand High Court's ruling, which set aside the President's Rule in the state, the apex court also said that Chief Secretary has nothing to do with the present case.

Related News: