Parrikar's plea

Former Goa Chief Minister Manohar Parrikar's petition challenging Governor SC Jamir's decision to dismiss his government was today directed to be listed for hearing on February 21 by the Supreme Court because the chief justice is currently on leave.

When the petition questioning the constitutional validity of the governor's February 2 decision to dismiss the BJP government was mentioned by former Attorney-General Soli J Sorabjee, a three-judge Bench headed by Justice N Santosh Hegde said it could not be heard today as it would have to be listed for hearing before a Bench headed by the chief justice.

A flummoxed Sorabjee wanted to know as to why such an "important" plea could not be heard by a three-judge Bench, Justice Hegde said it was a rule made by the registry that matters pertaining to important persons be heard only by the chief justice.

When Sorabjee wanted to know as to what happens when an important matter is raised by a commoner, Justice Hegde, who is the seniormost judge of the apex court, said in a lighter vein "we can deal with less important persons".

However, on repeated requests the Bench posted the petition seeking a stay of the functioning of the Pratapsingh Rane government for hearing on February 21 instead of February 25, fixed by the registry.

Narrating the sequence of events of February 2, when the Parrikar government won a trust vote in the Assembly by 18 to 6 votes in controversial circumstances, the petitioner said the governor "has no power at all to dismiss a ministry, which has not been voted out on a motion of no confidence".

"The dismissal of the Parrikar government being null and void, the necessary legal consequence is that the holding of office by Rane is without legal title or legal authority of law and amounts to a continuous usurpation of office by Rane," Parrikar said in his petition.

Quoting the provisions of Article 164, which was invoked by the governor to dismiss Parrikar government, the petitioner said the article stipulated that the ministers would hold office during the pleasure of the governor.

"The said article does not state that the chief minister will hold his office during the pleasure of the governor. Therefore, assuming that the governor does have the discretion to dismiss any minister under this article, this power cannot extend to the dismissal of the chief minister," he said.

Referring to the victory in the floor test, Parrikar said "loss of confidence of the House is an objective fact, to be established on the floor of the house and does not depend upon the ipse dixit or the subjective assessment of the governor."

Parrikar also assailed the decision of the governor to install the Rane government without stipulating any time limit for a floor test to enable it to prove majority on the floor of the House.