ASOK PANDE Vs. AZAM KHAN AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The communication between His Excellency the Governor, the Speaker of the State Legislative Assembly, it's newspaper reporting correlating it to the contents of words spoken by a Cabinet Minister of the State placed in this petition as the first respondent, and the expectations of the petitioner from the Chief Minister of the State to honour the express opinion of the Governor is the basis of this exercise in the writ jurisdiction, praying for a quo warranto through a judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Reliefs ancillary to the same for removal of the 1st respondent from the Council of Ministers of the present government, have also been prayed for on the ground that the Governor has expressed displeasure on the conduct of the Minister describing him as unworthy of occupying the office held by him and incapable of discharging his duties.

(2.) The petitioner has appeared in person and has urged that the respondent No.1 does not deserve to continue as a Cabinet Minister of the present Government of U.P. for having lost the pleasure of the Governor as per his opinion on account of the reported incidents, where the concerned Minister appears to have hurled accusations against the Governor for stalling several bills moved by the Legislature by not giving his assent, as if the Governor was working under some political influence. A reference has been made in particular to the Nagar Nigam bill 2015 which is the department of the respondent No.1 as Minister In-charge.

(3.) The petitioner's contention is that the remarks that were made by the Minister against the Governor came to be widely reported in newspapers whereupon the Governor had requested the Speaker of the Vidhan Sabha to provide him the edited and the unedited copies of the audio and video Compact Discs (CDs) of the statement of the concerned Minister, and on going through the same, the Governor found it to be highly objectionable. It is also alleged in the petition that the Speaker had expunged about 1/3rd of the contents of the speech of the Minister delivered inside the house and on coming to know the said facts, the Governor proceeded to write a letter to the Speaker of the Assembly raising a question mark on the capability of the Minister to function in that capacity as the language of the Minister was not favourable to the dignity and tradition of the House.