Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Rajendra Rathore Son Of Late Sri Uttam ... vs The Honble Speaker, Rajasthan Assembly on 20 January, 2023
Bench: Pankaj Mithal, Shubha Mehta
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 18077/2022
Rajendra Rathore Son Of Late Sri Uttam Singh Rathore
----Petitioner
Versus
The Honble Speaker, Rajasthan Assembly
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rajendra Rathore, petitioner in person For Respondent(s) : Mr. M.S. Singhvi, AG with Mr. Sheetanshu Sharma HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. PANKAJ MITHAL HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SHUBHA MEHTA Order 20/01/2023 Certain Members of the Legislative Assembly tendered resignations to the Hon'ble Speaker on 25.09.2022. No action was taken on the said resignations, therefore, this Public Interest Litigation was initiated seeking direction that a decision may be taken on the resignations tendered by the MLAs at the earliest.
This Court by one of its order has observed that the sole issue which is arising for consideration is to the time period within which the Hon'ble Speaker is supposed to take decision on the resignations so tendered in discharge of his statutory obligations.
Learned Advocate General has filed affidavit of respondent No.2 dated 16.01.2023 stating that all the MLAs have withdrawn their resignations but without disclosing the date as to when the resignations were withdrawn. It appears that the said MLAs have moved some application expressing their intention to withdraw the resignations. Thus, the Hon'ble Speaker upon consideration of the (Downloaded on 24/01/2023 at 12:27:56 AM) (2 of 2) [CW-18077/2022] resignation letters and such applications appears to have taken a decision on 13.01.2023 allegedly rejecting the resignations.
Neither the copies of the applications for the withdrawal of resignations have been placed on record nor the order of the Hon'ble Speaker refusing to accept the resignations are before us.
In addition to the above, it has also not been clarified as to what ought to be the fair and reasonable time for taking decision when such resignations are tendered.
Thus, looking to the overall facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the petitioner has moved an application No.1/2023, we require the learned Advocate General to obtain fresh instructions in the matter and, if necessary, file additional affidavit responding to the queries as made above and also replying to the averments made in the aforementioned application filed by the petitioner.
It goes without saying that the petitioner is not pressing the point earlier raised by him that the learned Advocate General has no authority of law to represent the Speaker.
List on 30.01.2023.
(SHUBHA MEHTA),J (PANKAJ MITHAL),CJ
N.K. GANDHI/ LAKSHYA SHARMA /35
(Downloaded on 24/01/2023 at 12:27:56 AM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)