The Supreme Court today made it clear that it may hear the plea against the proposed ordinance to protect convicted lawmakers from disqualification only after the law gets the nod from the President.
In response to the submission that the Presidential nod to the ordinance was merely a formality, a bench of Justices A. K. Patnaik and J. S. Kehar said, “Suppose the Ordinance is passed, we can still pass the stay order. You mention the matter on Monday, if it is cleared.”
The court said it cannot hear the plea when the Ordinance in question was in the process of being promulgated.
During the brief hearing, advocate M. L. Sharma said the Ordinance was being fast-tracked in view of impending verdict in a fodder scam case involving RJD chief Lalu Prasad as one of the accused.
“Moreover, the President is duty bound to clear the Ordinance,” he said.
Earlier, the lawyer had filed the PIL for quashing the Ordinance proceedings by the Union Cabinet for amending the law to protect convicted MPs and MLAs from facing immediate disqualification.
There was “no extraordinary emergency” circumstance to issue Ordinance for amending Representation of the People Act and the Ordinance process be declared “illegal and unconstitutional”, it said.
A fraud was committed by political leaders on the Constitution with “vested interest to demolish basic structure and fundamental right of the Constitution, the plea said.
“The respondent (Principal Secretary, PMO and Union of India) has misused Article 123 and Ordinance process which is not permitted under Constitution, therefore, impugned adopted Ordinance process must be declared illegal and unconstitutional,” the PIL said.