UPPU VENKATARAMANA Vs. STATE OF A P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this writ petition, the petitioner seeks a Writ of Quo Warranto against the 5th respondent requiring him to show as to the authority, as per law, under which he is holding the Office of the Chief Minister of the State and further seeking the relief for declaring the appointment of the 5th respondent as Chief Minister as unconstitutional and violative of Article 164(1) of the Constitution of India.

(2.) WE have heard Mr. P.V. Krishnaiah, learned counsel for the petitioner.

(3.) DURING the course of hearing, learned counsel has taken us through the historical events preceding the appointment of the 5th respondent by showing us the manner in which the majority Legislature Parties, in the past, elected its leader and the manner in which the said decision was communicated to the then Governor, who has there upon invited such leader to be sworn in as Chief Minister. Similar such instances where Chief Ministers in the past were invited by the Governor following similar procedure are shown to us from the papers filed by the petitioner and it is contended that in the case of the 5th respondent, admittedly, the Congress Legislature Party of the State reportedly resolved to request the Congress President to select a new leader and on such selection, the