news details |
|
|
| Who is impeding CM's constitutional authority? | | | Early Times Report
Jammu, Feb 13: The Peerzada issue regarding his decision to submit his resignation directly to the Congress President Sonia Gandhi bypassing the Chief Minister has ruffled many feathers in the political circles of the State.
It is probably for the first time in the history of the State since 1947 that a minister has decided to bypass the CM and instead opted to submit resignation to his party President. Doesn't the legitimacy of such an action and its acceptance by the powers those be suggest that if a minister of the NC resigns from the council of ministers in future he/she would submit the letter of resignation to the NC President and not the CM who is the constitutional authority for submission, acceptance and rejection of a resignation by any member of the council of his ministers?
Although it has been argued that the decision to submit the resignation to the Congress President is the right thing Mr. Peerzada should have done, the fact remains that its constitutional implications cannot be overlooked.
What authority does the CM have over his council of ministers if they are answerable only to their party Presidents and not to the authority that is constitutionally empowered to recommend their induction or ouster to the Governor?
Coalition Dharma is okay when the functioning of a leader belonging to a certain political party is concerned in connection with the discharge of his responsibilities in party matters. The collation Dharma has no relevance where a point of constitution is arises.
Reacting to the Peerzada episode, G.M. Saroori, another senior Congress leader who had to vacate his position as a minister said yesterday the Congress high command had applied two different yardsticks to a similar situation. How was Saroori removed from the state cabinet? Didn't the coalition Dharma come in the way of his removal? Why was not the mantra of coalition Dharma applied to his case? Does it mean that the Congress High command Okayed Saroori's ouster and objected to Peerzada's ouster? Nobody can question the right of the state CM as to how he handles his council of ministers, but allowing a remote control from a non-constitutional authority in matters where the state constitution is concerned is fraught with serious consequences.
The CM has the right to run the government as per the constitution and nobody can deputize for the CM either operating his authority directly or through remote control.
The whole bizarre drama revolving around the hyped demand for resignation and later its submission to a person having no constitutional authority has eroded the credibility of the state government. Expecting the CM to exercise his authority with competence when the same is impeded by his own coalition partners is something that can at best or worst simply be described as unfortunate. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
