|  |  | 

India Top Headlines

SC follows “disturbing” order from Andhra HC | India News


NEW DELHI: The Andhra Pradesh government, led by YS Jaganmohan Reddy, scored a brown point against the high court on Friday and the Supreme Court suspended a HC order with the intention of judging “whether there is a constitutional break in the state or not “and called the order” Unprecedented and disturbing. ”
While listening to a petition for habeas corpus and other allegations on alleged police excesses and atrocities, an HC bench of judges Rakesh Kumar and J Uma Devi had said on October 1: “On the next date, the lead attorney to appear on behalf state may come prepared to assist the court as to whether in the circumstances prevailing in the state of Andhra Pradesh, the court may record a finding that there is a constitutional breakdown in the state or not. ”
Appearing for Andhra Pradesh on its appeal against the provisional order of the HC, Attorney General Tushar Mehta said in the constitutional structure of the federal government in India, the courts could not decide whether the constitutional machinery has collapsed in a state, which is only in the domain of the government of the Union since the consequences of such determination would justify the removal of an elected government and the imposition of a central government.
A bench of Chief Justice SA Bobde and justices AS Bopanna and V Ramasubramanian were quick to call HC’s order “unprecedented and disturbing”. “In my entire career as a judge and even as a lawyer, I have never seen an order like this approved by an HC or the Supreme Court,” the CJI said.
Before suspending proceedings in the case before the HC, the CJI-led tribunal said: “We found it disturbing. We maintain order. “In his order, the bank said:” Issue notice, returnable immediately after the following Christmas / New Year holidays. Until further orders, there will be a suspension of subsequent procedures. ”
This was the second time this week that the Andhra government, which was embroiled in a dispute with the HC, was successful, the first was the SC college’s decision to recommend the transfer of AP HC CJ JK Maheshwari to Sikkim HC after that CM Jaganmohan Reddy wrote a letter in October requesting the CJI to restore the “neutrality” of the HC.
In its request for special permission against the HC’s October 1 provisional order, the AP government said: “The HC, in an unprecedented manner and without any grounds or allegations from either party to that effect, had approved the order”.
“Under the scheme of the Constitution, it is Article 356 that deals with the failure of the constitutional machinery in a state. Under this article, if the president, upon receiving a report from the governor of a state or otherwise, is satisfied that a situation has arisen in which the government of the state cannot be carried out in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution, the President can impose the government of the president. This is a power conferred exclusively on the executive. Power in this sense, such as sending a report to the President or the governor or recording a finding in this regard, cannot be exercised by the judiciary ”.
The state government further said, “Constitutional courts do not have any judicially detectable and manageable standard for determining whether there has been a constitutional break in a state. It is essentially an executive function and must necessarily be based on a detailed factual analysis. The courts simply have no means of deciding such issues. In fact, the order is a serious usurpation of the listed executive powers. under the Constitution and, therefore, violates the doctrine of the separation of powers. ”

Reference page