The Patna High Court today dismissed two petitions challenging the formation of the new government in Bihar..The Bench of Chief Justice Rajendra Menon and Justice Anil Kumar Upadhyay held that the petitions were rendered infructuous, as the majority in the State Assembly had already been proved through a floor test..Deo Kumar Singh, one of the petitioners, had contended that the government had been formed without calling the single largest party in the Legislative Assembly for proving its majority. Appearing for the other petitioner, Senior Advocate BP Pandey argued that this was contrary to the Supreme Court judgments in SR Bommai v. Union of India and Rameshwar Prasad Versus v. Union of India..Additional Solicitor General SD Sanjay and Advocate General Lalit Kishore, appearing for the central and the state governments respectively, however, argued that the petitions are infructuous, since a floor test had been held to determine the majority on July 28..Agreeing with this view, the Bench held,.“…one of the main criteria approved by the Constitution for determining the majority or resolving such issues is a floor test in the Assembly….…we need not go into any further issue in the matter, now, when, once the floor test within the assembly, which is the sole test laid down under the Constitution and approved in the case of S.R. Bommai (supra), has been conducted and the party/ group staking its claim to form the Government, has proved its majority…”.The Court thus dismissed both petitions..Read the judgment:
The Patna High Court today dismissed two petitions challenging the formation of the new government in Bihar..The Bench of Chief Justice Rajendra Menon and Justice Anil Kumar Upadhyay held that the petitions were rendered infructuous, as the majority in the State Assembly had already been proved through a floor test..Deo Kumar Singh, one of the petitioners, had contended that the government had been formed without calling the single largest party in the Legislative Assembly for proving its majority. Appearing for the other petitioner, Senior Advocate BP Pandey argued that this was contrary to the Supreme Court judgments in SR Bommai v. Union of India and Rameshwar Prasad Versus v. Union of India..Additional Solicitor General SD Sanjay and Advocate General Lalit Kishore, appearing for the central and the state governments respectively, however, argued that the petitions are infructuous, since a floor test had been held to determine the majority on July 28..Agreeing with this view, the Bench held,.“…one of the main criteria approved by the Constitution for determining the majority or resolving such issues is a floor test in the Assembly….…we need not go into any further issue in the matter, now, when, once the floor test within the assembly, which is the sole test laid down under the Constitution and approved in the case of S.R. Bommai (supra), has been conducted and the party/ group staking its claim to form the Government, has proved its majority…”.The Court thus dismissed both petitions..Read the judgment:
