Back
High Court Of Rajasthan
Judgename : D.S.Dave,Kan Singh
YOGENDRA NATH HANDA - Appellant
Versus
STATE - Respondent
Civil Writ Petn. 219 Of 1966
Decided On : 03/21/1966
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW - PRIVILEGES OF LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY - EXPULSION OF MEMBERS - POWER OF GOVERNOR TO REMOVE MEMBERS FROM ASSEMBLY HALL - VALIDITY OF ADDRESS BY GOVERNOR - POWER OF LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY TO TAKE DISCIPLINARY ACTION AGAINST MEMBERS - SCOPE OF JUDICIAL REVIEW.
Fact of the Case:
On 26th February 1966, the Governor of Rajasthan summoned the Rajasthan Legislative Assembly to meet for its budget session. Before the Governor could deliver his address, one of the petitioners, Shri Ramanand Aggarwal, started addressing the Governor about certain Ordinances issued by him and other actions. The Governor ordered the Serjeant-at-Arms to remove Shri Aggarwal from the Assembly Hall, and subsequently, two other members were also removed. On 28th February 1966, a resolution was passed by the Assembly to suspend the 12 members, including the petitioners, for the remaining part of the current session. The petitioners challenged the validity of these proceedings, arguing that the Governor had no jurisdiction to expel them from the Assembly Hall and that the address by the Governor was not valid.
Finding of the Court:
The Court held that the Governor had no right or jurisdiction to take disciplinary action against any member of the House by turning them out from the Assembly Hall through the Serjeant-at-Arms or any other officer. The Court also held that the Governor had addressed the Assembly in accordance with Article 176 (1) of the Constitution and that the entire proceedings of the Rajasthan Legislative Assembly were not null and void. The Court further held that the Legislative Assembly had the power to take disciplinary action against its members for their conduct within the four walls of the House itself and that the petitioners could not challenge the action of the Assembly in expelling them for the remainder of the session.
Issues: 1. Whether the Governor had the right or jurisdiction to take disciplinary action against any member of the House by turning them out from the Assembly Hall through the Serjeant-at-Arms or any other officer? 2. Whether the Governor had addressed the Assembly in accordance with Article 176 (1) of the Constitution? 3. Whether the Legislative Assembly had the power to take disciplinary action against its members for their conduct within the four walls of the House itself? 4. Whether the petitioners could challenge the action of the Assembly in expelling them for the remainder of the session?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The Court held that the Governor had no right or jurisdiction to take disciplinary action against any member of the House by turning them out from the Assembly Hall through the Serjeant-at-Arms or any other officer, as the Legislative Assembly had all the powers, privileges and immunities enjoyed by the House of Commons of the parliament of the United Kingdom at the commencement of the Constitution, including the implied right to punish its own members for their conduct in Parliament. 2. The Court held that the Governor had addressed the Assembly in accordance with Article 176 (1) of the Constitution, as he had read some portions of his speech from the beginning and a portion of his concluding speech, and the House by its resolution took the speech as read. 3. The Court held that the Legislative Assembly had the power to take disciplinary action against its members for their conduct within the four walls of the House itself, as it had all the powers, privileges and immunities enjoyed by the House of Commons of the parliament of the United Kingdom at the commencement of the Constitution, including the implied right to punish its own members for their conduct in Parliament. 4. The Court held that the petitioners could not challenge the action of the Assembly in expelling them for the remainder of the session, as the Assembly had the power to take disciplinary action against its members for their conduct within the four walls of the House itself.
Final Decision: The Court dismissed the writ petitions in limine.
( 1 ) WE have before us three writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution filed by three members of the Rajasthan Legislative Assembly respectively, by which they seek to challenge the validity of certain proceedings of the Rajasthan legislative Assembly taken on 26th February, 1966 and 28th February. 1966, and pray for issuances of appropriate writ, direction or order against the respondents. As the writ petitions raise certain common questions, they can conveniently be dealt with together.
( 2 ) WRIT petitions of Servashri Yogendra Nath Handa and Manikchand Surana were argued by Shri C. L. Agarwal and that of Shri Ramanand Aggarwal was argued by shri R. K. Garg The writ petitions referred to certain events that took place in the rajasthan Legislative Assembly on 26th Feb 1966 and 28th February 1966, and they are like this.
( 3 ) THE Governor of Rajasthan summoned the Rajasthan Legislative Assembly to meet for its budget session on 26th February, 1966, at 11. 00 a. m. Accordingly the assembly met in the Assembly Hall on 26th February. 1966. The Governor of rajasthan entered the Hall to deliver his address under Article 176 of the constitution However before the Governor could deliver his address, one of the three petitioners namely, Shri Ramanand Aggarwal started addressing the governor about his having issued certain Ordinances and for some other actions of his and he submitted that it would have been better of instead of issuing ordinances, the necessary. Bills were introduced in the Assembly itself At this the governor is said to have taken offence and he ordered the Serjeant-at-Arms of the assembly to turn out Shri Ramanand Aggarwal from the Assembly Hall and accordingly the Serjeant-at-Arms, respondent No. 5, forcibly removed Shri ramanand Aggarwal from the Assembly Hall. While Shri Ramanand Aggarwal was being so removed, another member Shri Ram Kisan is said to have protested against the treatment meted out to Shri Aggarwal. but this had no result and on the contrary Shri Ram Kishan was ordered by the Governor to be removed from the Assembly Hall and the Serjeant-at-Arms forcibly removed him as well. The protest was repeated by Shri Umrao Singh Dhabaria, another member of the rajasthan Legislative Assembly, and he suffered the same fate. Servashri yogendra Nath Handa and Manik Chand Surana were amongst those who also protested in turn and they too were removed. It is averred that in this way 12 members of the Assembly were removed from the Assembly Hall under orders of the Governor. Thereafter, it is alleged, that on a motion by Shri Maharawal Laxman Singh, leader of the Opposition Group, a resolution was passed by the House that the address of the Governor may be taken to have been read. The Governor then left the Assembly Hall. The meeting of the Assembly was then over, but it met again in the after-noon when some of the members, who had been expelled by the governor, attended the session, 27th February, 1966, was a holiday and, therefore, the Assembly met again on 28th February, 1966. On that day Shri Ram prasad Ladha, respondent No. 6, moved a resolution in the House to the effect that the conduct of all the 12 members of the Rajasthan Legislative Assembly including the petitioners amounted to obstruction to the Governor in reading his address and it also amounted to improper and indecent act which was also contempt of the Constitution and insult to the Nation and, therefore, these 12 members be suspended till the end of the current session. Certain members of the house including the petitioner Shri Manik Chand Surana raised objections about the admissibility of this motion, but the Speaker, after three hours discussion, admitted the motion and this motion expelling the 12 members including the petitioners for the remaining part of the current session was passed. The same day a motion was moved by two of the petitioners and some other members to the effect that the Governor had committed breach of
AI
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
