U.C.DHYANI
Subodh Uniyal – Appellant
Versus
Speaker Legislative Assembly – Respondent
U.C. Dhyani, J.
1. Since the factual matrix of the above noted writ petitions and the law governing the field is the same, therefore, both the writ petitions are being decided together for the sake of brevity and convenience.
Reliefs Sought
2. By means of present writ petitions, the petitioners seek following reliefs, among others:
“(a) Writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari be issued quashing the notices dated 19.03.2016 annexed as Annexure-1 alongwith the Order dated 27.03.2016 of the Speaker annexed as Annexure 11.
(b) Writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus or any other writ, order or direction allowing the petitioners to participate in any voting of the legislature as ordered by the Governor, or for any other purposes.”
Factual Matrix
3. The facts giving rise to the present writ petitions are that all the petitioners are the Members of Legislative Assembly (MLAs) of Uttarakhand and belong to the Indian National Congress Party as they were elected on the tickets of Indian National Congress. Smt. Indira Hridyesh, former Minister of Parliamentary Affairs (respondent no.2 herein) filed complaint against the petitioners before the Speaker with a prayer f
D. Sudhakar (2) & others vs. D. N. Jeevaraju & others
Dr. Mahachandra Prasad Singh vs. Chairman Bihar Legislative Assembly & others
Kulwant Kaur vs. Gurdial Singh Mann
Narayan Bhagwantrao Gosavi Balajiwale v. Gopal Vinayak Gosavi and Ors. [(1960) 1 SCR 773]
Balchandra L. Jarkiholi & others vs. B.S. Yeddyurappa & others
S. Subramaniam Balaji vs. State of Tamil Nadu & others
Rajendra Singh Rana & others vs. Swami Prasad Maurya & others
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.