VIMLA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Counsel for the petitioner-Mr. R.B. Mathur argued that the impugned notice dt. 10/7/2019, has been issued in an arbitrary and illegal manner.

(2.) Counsel submitted that the petitioner earlier had faced the same proceedings of carrying out No Confidence Motion against her and she had approached this Court by filing D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14236/2018 (Smt. Vimla v. State of Rajasthan and Ors.) and this Court vide order dt. 8/8/2018 allowed the writ petition of the petitioner and held that similar issue was already decided by this Court in the case of Rajkumar Jaiswal v. State of Rajasthan and Ors. (D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 23845/2017), wherein Rule 2 (1)(b) of the Rules of 2017 was struck down.

(3.) Counsel for the petitioner argued that No Confidence Motion which was to be initiated against the petitioner, was not carried out as members of the Parliament-State Assembly were excluded, when the notice of No Confidence Motion was given.