'Can Be Listed Only After Placing Before CJI' : Supreme Court Vacation Bench On Plea To Sack Delhi Minister Satyender Jain & Maharashtra Minister Nawab Malik

Requesting for getting the matter listed Upadhyay submitted before the bench of Justices CT Ravikumar and Sudhanshu Dhulia that there has been serious violation of Article 14.

"Cabinet minister in Maharashtra is in Judicial Custody for 4 months and another minister has been for 30 days. Minister means public servant. Serious violation of Art 14," Upadhyay further submitted.

Remarking that the matters need to be posted before the CJI first and only then it could be posted, the bench said, "Did you make a mention before the Registrar? On every day we're saying that make mention before the Registrar & even if that's not posted then mention before us. You've made a mention, most probably it'll be posted next week. Such matters need to be posted before hon'ble CJI first. Then only it'll be posted."

The writ petition also seeks to ensure that any Minister, who is not only a public servant under Section 21 of Indian Penal Code and Section 2(c) of the Prevention of Corruption Act but also a "Law Maker" and takes constitutional oath under Schedule-3, shall be temporarily debarred from holding the office, after 2 days in judicial custody.

"Permitting criminals to become legislators results in the breakdown of the rule of law both in terms of the government machinery as well as the system of administration of justice. This Hon'ble Court must take steps to deter criminals from becoming legislators also to uphold the rule of law inherent in Article 14," the petition states.

Alternatively, it prays that being the custodian of the Constitution, the Supreme Court should direct the Law Commission to examine election laws of developed countries and prepare a comprehensive report to maintain nobility & dignity of Ministers, Legislators and Public Servants in spirit of Article 14.

The petition also states that unlike public servants, Ministers like Nawab Malik and Satyendar Jain are still enjoying constitutional position, even while being in judicial custody for long time, which is arbitrary and contrary to Article 14.

Case Title: Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay v. Union of India & Ors.