HC appoints ‘amicus-curiae’ in dual post

Meghalaya high court
Meghalaya high court

SHILLONG, APR 15: Meghalaya high court appointed an ‘amicus-curiae’ – a friend of the court- to assisting the court in the case relating to holding of dual post filed by the Civil Society Women Organisation (CSWO) who sought disqualification of eight legislators who are also members of the Autonomous District Councils (ADCs).

Pradeep KR Rai, an advocate of the Supreme Court, has been appointed as an ‘amicus-curiae’ during the hearing on Wednesday.  An amicus-curiae is someone who is not a party to a case but offers information that has bearing on the case. He is not solicited by either of the parties to assist a court.

Meghalaya high court sat on Wednesday to dwell on the CSWO’s PIL.

Kharshiing said, “The court has appointed the amicus-curiae, a friend of the court, who is a constitutional lawyer so that a good judgement can be arrived with regards to this case.”

Expressing hope that something good would come out on her PIL, Kharshiing reiterated her argument , “Holding of dual posts by the public representatives have affected the public in the state especially in the rural areas.”

According to Kharshiing, people would be victimize and will not get the benefits of various schemes of the government in the case if they had not voted for the particular legislator, who is also an MDC of that constituency.

The eight legislators named in the PIL featured former Meghalaya Deputy Speaker Sanbor Shullai, Cabinet District Council Affairs (DCA) Minister HDR Lyngdoh, Nongkrem MLA Ardent Miller Basaiawmoit, Independent MLA Stephanson Mukhim, Mawsynram MLA Pynshngainlang N Syiem, HSPDP MLA Phlastingwell Pangniang and UDP MLA Brolding Nongsiej.

While seven of the legislators are members in the Khasi Hills Autonomous District Council (KHADC), Mukhim is a member of Jaintia Hills Autonomous District Council (JHADC).

Kharshiing, in her petition states – “As per Rule 17 (1) (a) of the Assam (and Meghalaya) Autonomous Districts (Constitution of District Councils) Rules, 1951 as adopted & amended by the JHADC and KHADC, a person shall be disqualified for being elected as, and for being member of the District Council, if he is a salaried servant of the government of India or government of any state specified in the First Schedule to the Constitution or is an employee of (any) District Council or of (any) Regional Council.”

“The eight legislators are holding the post of the Member of the Legislative Assembly (MLA) prior to their election to the post of the member of district council (MDC) and therefore has violated the specified provision under Rule 17 (1) (a) and hence they are liable to be disqualified to be such member of the district council,” Kharshiing said.

As per the RTI replied to Kharshiing’s questioned the salaries given to eight legislators as MDC is Rs 38,250 and as MLA is Rs 1 lakh.

Earlier, all the eight legislators besides KHADC had filed their affidavits on this issue. Meanwhile, the high court has fixed May 12 as the next hearing.- By Our Reporter

 

You May Also Like

More From Author

+ There are no comments

Add yours