SATPAL SINGH SATTI Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since in these petitions the issue to be adjudicated is common, hence these petitions are being taken together for adjudication. The sole question for consideration in the present petitions is the Legislative competence of the Legislature of Himachal Pradesh to make the impugned Act i.e The Himachal Pradesh Parliamentary Secretaries (Appointment, Salaries, Allowances, Powers, Privileges and Amenities) Act, 2006 (Act No. 1 of 2007) (hereinafter for purpose of brevity referred to as the Act), which received the assent of the Governor on the 23/1/2007 and was published in Hindi and English in the Rajpatra, Himachal Pradesh (Extraordinary), dtd. 24/1/2007, (pp. 9895-9904).

(2.) By virtue of the impugned Act an office of a Parliamentary Secretary for a Member of the Himachal Pradesh Legislative Assembly in the State of Himachal Pradesh has been created.

(3.) In CWP No 2507 of 2013, petitioners are the Members of Legislative Assembly of Himachal Pradesh, who belong to the Bhartiya Janta Party. Respondent No.1 is the State of Himachal Pradesh, which has been sued through the Chief Secretary to the Government of Himachal Pradesh. Respondent No.2 is the Secretary to the Governor, Himachal Pradesh. Respondent No.3 is the Principal Secretary Finance to the Government of Himachal Pradesh. Respondent No.4 was arrayed as party on account of having been appointed as a Deputy Chief Minister in the State of Himachal Pradesh. His appointment as Deputy Chief Minister had been assailed in the present petition. Other than the aforesaid respondents No.5 to 10, who are also the Members of the Legislative Assembly of Himachal Pradesh, have been arrayed as parties to the lis on account of having been appointed as Chief Parliamentary Secretaries under the impugned Act.