Twenty AAP MLAs Disqualified For Holding Office Of Profit

Must Read

What is the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016?

The Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (“RERA”) is an Act of the Parliament. It seeks to protect...

Should the Exorbitant Amounts Charged for RT-PCR Tests be Refunded?

Introduction A plea has been filed in the Honourable Supreme Court of India seeking a refund of exorbitant amounts charged...

Should CCTV’s be Installed in the Police Station?

Introduction In a recent judgment, the bench led by Justice Nariman issued directions to both the state and Union Territory...

A Legal Analysis of the West Bengal Political Crisis on IPS Deputation

The Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) has recently summoned three IPS officers of West Bengal (WB). The decision was...

Explained: Postal Ballot for NRIs

At the end of November 2020, Election Commission sent a proposal to the law ministry to amend the Representation...

Explained: Constitutional Provisions and Legislations With Regards to a Person with Disabilities

The world celebrates December 3 as International Day of Persons with Disabilities (IDPD). This day is also called World...

Follow us

The Disqualification

On 21st January 2018, the President of India confirmed the disqualification of 20 AAP MLAs on the recommendation of the Election Commission. This was the result of a petition filed against them by a young lawyer in 2015, alleging that they were holding “office of profit” with the Government as all of them were Parliament Secretaries.

Post Of ‘Parliamentary Secretary’ Constitutes Office Of Profit?

The question of whether the post of a ‘Parliamentary Secretary’ constitutes an ‘office of profit’ or not is to be decided judiciously. As a Parliamentary Secretary assists a Minister, the office usually comes with perks as well as a measure of political influence. Hence, it would ideally constitute an “office of profit”. But in a notification confirming their appointment, it was stated by the Government of India that they would not be given any kind of perks or remuneration by the Government. Nevertheless, on 19th January 2018, the Election Commission (EC) had written to the President asking him to disqualify the 20 AAP MLAs on the grounds that they held offices of profit while occupying the post of Parliamentary Secretaries between March 13, 2015 and September 8, 2016.

The Decision

The President has held in favor of the EC and passed a 120-page order disqualifying 20 MLAs. The MLAs who have been axed are Alka Lamba, Adarsh Shastri, Sanjeev Jha, Rajesh Gupta, Kailash Gehlot, Vijendra Garg, Praveen Kumar, Sharad Kumar, Madan Lal Khufiya, Shiv Charan Goyal, Sarita Singh, Naresh Yadav, Rajesh Rishi, Anil Kumar, Som Dutt, Avtar Singh, Sukhvir Singh Dala, Manoj Kumar and Nitin Tyagi.

The appointment of the respondent MLAs as Parliamentary Secretaries by the GNCTD bypasses and frustrates the objective sought to be achieved by Section 15(1)(a) of The Government Of National Capital Territory Of Delhi Act, 1991 and is also against the principle of legislative oversight of the Government which is the basic tenet of Parliamentary form of Democracy,” the EC said in its exhaustive recommendation to the President, which was accepted by the latter.

Preceding Circumstances And Resulting Consequences

All the members of the AAP were enraged by the hasty decision taken by the President of India. They were trying to hold a meeting with the President in regard to this matter but their efforts could not materialize due to the President’s busy schedule. Earlier attempts were made by the Delhi Chief Minister to exclude the office of Parliament Secretary from the ambit of “Office of Profit” but they were not successful. In response, it was alleged by the MLAs that the ruling Central Government is misusing the Constitutional machinery in order to win the upcoming elections in Delhi. All the 20 AAP MLAs had moved the Delhi High Court challenging the EC’s recommendation but Justice Rekha Palli had refused to pass any interim order.

The Congress party members alleged that AAP was being helped by BJP and the Election Commission as the decision was delayed by 3 weeks. If the MLAs would have been disqualified before December 22, they would have been ineligible for voting in the Rajya Sabha elections. However, this development will not affect the AAP’s position in Delhi Assembly as it has already 66 out of 70 seats in the same. But the BJP and the Congress parties have demanded resignation from Arvind Kejriwal on moral grounds.

The Constitutional experts have stated that the Courts have the power to set aside the recommendations of the Election Commission. In case they are not set aside, fresh elections are to be held in the next six months. The recommendation can be subjected to legal scrutiny.

The decision of the High Court is greatly awaited as it is going to make a breakthrough in the jurisprudence of the concept of “Office of Profit”. Though the Government has given criteria to define the same, this is a unique situation where the President has allegedly used his power in haste and delivered an incorrect decision.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Latest News

UK Supreme Court Rules in Favour of Policyholders in the COVID-19 Business Interruption Case

The United Kingdom’s Supreme Court finally concluded the long-awaited COVID-19 business interruption case brought by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) and the Hiscox Action...

Kerala High Court Disposes of Writ Petition on Grounds That Reliefs Sought Are Already in Process of Being Granted, Directs State to Complete the...

Excerpt A single-judge bench consisting of Hon’ble Justice Shircy V. gave orders on the writ petition filed by the Petitioner. This writ is filed by...

Supreme Court Directs Government To Provide Free Education To Minor Children of Rape Victims

The Deputy Commissioner of Ranchi was directed by the Supreme Court on Wednesday to make sure that minor children of rape victims are ensured free education till they attain the age of 14 years. The Court made the observation while hearing a plea filed by a woman who claimed that she belonged to the SC/ST group from Jharkhand. She was forced by a man after which her father lodged a complaint.

Aadhar Review Plea Rejected in a 4:1 Verdict by Supreme Court

The petition seeking the re-examination of the 2018 Aadhar Verdict which declares the Aadhar act constitutional and valid was dismissed by a 5-judge bench in a 4:1 verdict. In January the petitions were considered by a bench of Justices A M Khanwilkar, D Y Chandrachud, S Abdul Nazeer, Ashok Bhushan, and B R Gavai in the chamber and the order was up on the website on Wednesday.

New Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) Amendments Are Valid Says Supreme Court

On Tuesday, the Supreme Court upheld the amendments in the insolvency and bankruptcy code which makes it mandatory for a minimum of 100 or 10% of home buyers of a project to initiate insolvency proceedings against a builder for not delivering flats or commercial shops on time.

[HUL – Sebamed Ad War] Bombay High Court Passed Injunction; Permits Sebamed Ad Against HUL’s Dove

The ad war between the German personal care brand Sebamed and the consumer goods giant Hindustan Unilever Ltd (HUL) has come to an end. On January 19th, Bombay High Court passed an injunction order permitting the Sebamed ad against Hindustan Unilever’s Dove without any changes. It was observed that Sebamed ads were backed with evidence-based data. However, Sebamed was ordered to put an end to its advertisement that compared HUL soap bars Lux, Pears, and Santoor with Rin and detergent category.

Bombay High Court Says White Collar Crimes Are More Dangerous Than Murder and Dacoity

The Aurangabad Bench of the Bombay High Court rejected 4 petitions of 4 businessmen after observing that white-collar crimes are more serious than murder and dacoity. The businesspersons were booked for fraud of evading GST by producing fake invoices.

Right To Protection Can’t Be Granted To Married Woman Involved in Live-in Relationship: Allahabad High Court

The Bench of Allahabad High Court dismissed a petition of a live-in couple, observing that a married woman in a live-in relationship is not entitled to any sort of legal protection whatsoever. The Court remarked that they are adults and should live as ‘husband and wife’ if they want no one to interfere in their lives.

Police To Decide on the Entry of Farmers To Delhi on Republic Day Says Supreme Court

While the Supreme Court heard a plea seeking an injunction against the tractor rally that is scheduled for January 26th, it held that it is the decision of the Delhi Police officers to see whether the protesting farmers should get entry into Delhi on Republic Day.

[Sushant Singh Rajput Case]: Republic TV & Times Now Hindered Investigation Probe Says Bombay HC

In November last year, the Court had reserved its judgement on the PILs that came from 8 former police officers from Maharashtra, lawyers, activists and NGOs, seeking restraining orders against the media trial in the Sushant Singh Rajput case.

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -