PAC Chairman cannot be "mouthpiece of Executive:" BJP MLA challenges appointment of Mukul Roy as PAC Chairman in Calcutta High Court

The appointment of Mukul Roy as the chairman of the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) of the West Bengal Legislative Assembly has been challenged before the Calcutta High Court, given his shift of allegiance to the All India Trinamool Congress Party (AITC) after he won the elections on a Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) ticket in May 2021 (Ambika Roy v. Hon’ble Speaker, West Bengal Legislative Assembly and ors.)..The PIL has been moved by BJP MLA Ambika Roy who has contended that the PAC Chairman/ Chairperson post is usually given to the leader of the opposition party as a matter of Constitutional convention. .She has, therefore, contended that the post should not be given to Mukul Roy as he has defected to the party of the ruling government (the All India Trinamool Congress/ AITC). ."Since 1967, after the constitution of the fourth legislative assembly of West Bengal, a leading member of the opposition was always chosen as the Chairman of the PAC. Since then, this practice of appointing opposition member as chairman of PAC has been followed consistently, which has now assumed the character of a constitutional convention and ought to be followed by Respondent 2 (Mukul Roy)", the petitioner stated. .Senior Counsel PS Narasimha appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that appointing Mukul Roy as the PAC chairperson would amount to a fraud on Constitution in view of his defection to TMC.The object of PAC is to conduct an independent scrutiny of executie spending and the chairperson of such a body cannot be a mouthpiece of the ruling party, it was submitted.As per reports, the Bench of Acting Chief Justice Rajesh Bindal and Justice Rajarshi Bharadwaj has posted the matter for further hearing on August 10..It is reported that the State of West Bengal opposed the plea on maintainability, prompting the Court to direct the petitioner give a note justifying the maintainability of the plea. The State was also given liberty to file a reply, as reported by The New Indian Express..Case Background.As per Rule 301 of the Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business of the West Bengal Legislative Assembly, a Committee of Public Accounts (PAC) is to be constituted based on the principle of proportional representation for each party in the West Bengal Legislative Assembly, the petitioner noted..Applying the principle of proportional representation, 14 seats would be reserved for AITC and 6 for the BJP in the PAC. .However, on June 24, Mukul Roy, without BJP’s support and without disclosing his party affiliation in the nomination papers, filed his nomination for election to the PAC, it was recanted. .The same day, two BJP MLAs, Ambika Roy (petitioner) and Bishnu Prasad filed objections before the Secretary, West Bengal Legislative Assembly challenging Mukul Roy’s nomination to the PAC. Bishnu Prasad’s and Ambika Roy’s objection petitions were rejected citing a technical ground that objections are not considered at the stage of scrutiny, it was submitted. .On June 24, 20 MLAs including MLA Mukul Roy were elected as PAC members. On July 9, the Speaker appointed Mukul Roy as the chairman of the PAC for 2021022. On July 13, ten BJP MLAs including, Ambika Roy, made a representation to the Governor seeking intervention on the election and nomination of Mukul Roy to the PAC, stating that Constitutional values have been compromised. Following this, the PIL was moved in the High Court. .Highlights of the Petitioner's contentions:.1. Constitutional convention obligates the Speaker to appoint or nominate a leader of the opposition as the PAC Chairman. However, the appointment has gone to Mukul Roy who won the elections on a BJP ticket, but who defected to the AITC on June 11, without resigning from the BJP. In view of the same, BJP MLA Suvendu Adhikari had also presented a petition to the Speaker seeking Mukul Roy's disqualification on the ground of defection since there was a violation of the provisions of the Xth schedule of the Constitution2. The PAC Chairman cannot be a mouthpiece of the executive. The petitioner highlighted that the PAC is tasked with examining cases involving losses, nugatory expenditure and financial irregularities. When any case of proved negligence resulting in loss or extravagant spending is brought to the Committee's notice, the Ministry concerned is called upon to explain as to what action, disciplinary or otherwise, has to be taken to prevent a recurrence. In such cases, the PAC also records its opinion either disapproving the action of the government or passing strictures against the extravagance or lack of proper control by the Ministry or Department concerned. As such, the very purpose of legislative control of the House over executive spending, which is one of the most important functions of the Legislative Assembly, will be rendered meaningless if PAC is indirectly controlled by the government and the chairman is the mouthpiece of the executive. The underlying purpose is to ensure scrutiny of public finances by independent supervision to be undertaken by a House Committee such as the PAC, i.e. to ensure that the “Executive remains responsible to the Legislature.” The independence of the PAC is essential to enforce executive accountability to the House. While so, it is argued that Mukul Roy is incapable of working with the necessary objectivity and impartiality. His appointment would dilute the PAC’s independence and interfere with its power to regulate the accountability of the Executive in the field of financial administration, the petitioner added. 3. The speaker’s knowledge of the disqualification proceedings against Mukul Roy and the haste with which he appointed Mukul Roy as PAC Chairman, while the disqualification proceedings were pending, shows utter disregard for established Constitutional norms, is a fraud on the Constitution, and is malice in law and fact which renders the appointment illegal and malafide, the petitioner further contended. Mukul Roy could not have been elected as a member of the PAC without first deciding whether he belonged to the BJP or any other party, including the AITC, the petitioner asserted..In view of these contentions, the petitioner has urged the High Court to quash the appointment of Mukul Roy as PAC Chairman and to direct the Speaker to appoint a member from the opposition party (BJP, in this case) as the PAC Chairperson. .The petition has been filed by Advocate on Record, Saket Sharma.