& çâÌæÚUæð´ ·¤è ¥ôÚU Îð¹Ùæ ÁæÚUè ÚU¹ð´ ¥ÍæüÌ ¥ÂÙð ÜÿØ ÂÚU ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´Ð ãæÚU Ù ×æÙð´, €UØô´ç·¤ ·¤æ× ·¤ÚUÙð âð ¥æÂ·¤ô ©gðàØ ·¤è Âýæç# ãôÌè ãñ ¥õÚU ÁèßÙ ·¤æ ¹æÜèÂÙ ÎêÚU ãôÌæ ãñÐ ÖÜð ãè ÁèßÙ ×ð´ ç·¤ÌÙè Öè ·¤çÆÙæ§ü €UØô´ Ù ¥æ°, çÁ™ææâæ ¥õÚU ©ˆâæã ÕÙæ° ÚU¹ð´Ð ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´, ÜÿØ ã×ðàææ ¥æÂ·Ô¤ Âæâ ãôÌð ãñ´ çÁ‹ãð´ ÂæÙð ·Ô¤ çÜ° ÂýØæâ ¥æÂ ·¤Öè Öè àæéM¤ ·¤ÚU â·¤Ìð ãñ´Ð

'Violation of Constitution' By a Judge

Speaker's observations have no legal effect: HC

Ashutosh Sarkar
The High Court has said the Speaker's observations that an HC judge has violated the constitution have "no legal effect" and are baseless in the eye of law.
The HC quoted the Speaker as observing, "A certain (HC) judge has violated the provision of Article 78(1) of the Constitution and what reasonable action may be taken for such conduct is being left for Hon'ble Chief Justice for necessary action."
The "impugned observations" have no "imperative force", the court said in a verdict, the full text of which was released yesterday.
In a ruling on June 18, Speaker Abdul Hamid said an HC judge (Justice AHM Shamsuddin Choudhury Manik) has violated the constitution by making "derogatory remark” about the Jatiya Sangsad and the Speaker.
“We will support whatever steps the chief justice may take with regard to such
SEE PAGE 19 COL 4 FROM PAGE 20
behaviour by a court," he said.
Contacted yesterday, the personal secretary to the Speaker said, “Sir (Speaker) will comment on the High Court verdict after getting a copy of it.”
The HC on July 24 disposed of a writ petition that challenged the legality of the Speaker's ruling, and said it (HC) would make some observations on the issue later.
In the full text of its verdict, the HC said that according to the constitution, the validity of proceeding of parliament cannot be questioned in any court.
It said the judge concerned did not raise any question regarding the validity of any proceeding of parliament in his court or in any court.
“The Supreme Court is vested with the power and duty to oversee that no public functionary oversteps the limit set by the constitution," the HC said, adding that parliament cannot claim to be the final arbiter of its privileges.
“Article 7 of the Constitution provides the sovereign power of the people. The people through the Constitution have limited the boundary of all the three organs of the State. It has been given only such power to the Parliament to legislate as are not to be conformative with the provisions of the Constitution," said the judgment delivered by an HC bench comprising Justice Hasan Foez Siddique and Justice ABM Altaf Hossain.
"Our Legislature has undoubtedly plenary powers, but these powers are controlled by the Constitution itself and can be exercised within the jurisdiction as provided by the Constitution," said the judgment.
The HC said the Speaker is not only the third man in the republic, he is indeed the patriarch of parliament, where all the representatives of the entire populace congregate.
During a hearing on June 5, Justice Manik observed that the Speaker had committed an offence tantamount to sedition by commentingin parliament on an HC order.
Hamid on May 29 said in the House that courts are neutral and independent. However, it looks odd when they take quick decisions to resolve their own problems