Sachin Pilot Camp's Plea : Live Updates From Rajasthan HC Hearing

Legislative rules of Assembly derive their validity from Constitution, they are not subordinate. They state that on receiving complaint Speaker should examine it and prima facie satisfaction is recorded before notice. All these were thrown out of ring : Rohatgi

The proceedings "reek of malafides", submits Rohatgi.

"Mind you, we are in the middle of COVID-19 and only 3 days time given for reply", he adds.

3. No material to show application of mind before notice.

4. Notice just paraphrases words of complaint.

5. No reasons recorded for issuing notice.

6. Notice says if reply is not in writing it will be decided ex-parte. 

Rohatgi cites the following facts as grounds showing malafides :

1. Notice issued on same day of complaint.

2. Less time granted for reply than as stated in rules.

#RajasthanPolitics #RajasthanPolitics

I am challenging the show-cause notice on the above said facts. The facts of the complaint, even if assumed to be correct, does not make out a case under Para 2(1)(a) of the 10th Schedule : Rohathgi.

A show-cause notice can be challenged on grounds of defect of jurisdiction, excess of jurisdiction, colourable exercise of power, mala fides, violation of principles of natural justice : Rohatgi.

It is not that the Court will shut its door when the challenge is against a show-cause notice : Rohatgi. 

Kihoto cannot be read as having ousted the jurisdiction of HC at the Speaker's pre-decision stage : Rohatgi

A judgment must be held binding for the propositions which it decides, and not for the propositions which logically flow from it, Rohatgi says, referring to the decision in (2008) 16 SCC 14 (para 7).

Rohatgi gives an example -. Imagine a member of ruling party in a select committee of Parliament. Select Committees often criticize government. In case of such a criticism by select committee, can that party member be regarded as having given up membership?.