When more than 6000 farmers committed suicides in vidarbha in last five years none of candidates who are contesting election of froth coming parliament election have raised the issue .As most of the sitting M.P. s are contesting election ,VJAS has started agitation to asking all candidates 'show report card' on burning issues of vidarbha.
As all serious issues of farm suicide, tribal hunger ,massive poverty and unemployment, power crisis and poor public health service and no growth in industrialization and increase in massive backlog of vidarbha in sector of irrigation, power generation, infrastructure development but none of political parties have done any in sort public agitation on these burning issues.
VJAS has urged all voters of vidarbha to ask for report card and social audit of performance of each candidates when they will their area of campaign .
‘we are doing this agitation in order to bring basic issue of vidarbha farmers suicides and agrarian crisis in central stage of parliament election but till it is very much missing as all political parties wants to avoid the public debate of this serious issue ,it’s most unfortunate ’ Kishore tiwari of VJAS informed in press note .
Congress party gives loksabha ticket to disqualified M.P.
Nagpur-21st march-2009
Indian congress party has once again made mockery of Indian parliamentary system when Shri Chandra Bhan Singh, MP who has been already disqualified under the Tenth Schedule to the Constitution and the Members of Lok Sabha (Disqualification on ground of Defection) Rules, 1985. by speaker somnath chaterjeein his order of 5th December,2008 ,here is order of speaker and the official list of congress candidates
I Quote
No. 6285 Table Office
(Anti-Defection Unit)
Decision of Speaker, Lok Sabha, on the petition given by Shri Santosh Gangwar, MP against Shri Chandra Bhan Singh, MP under the Tenth Schedule to the Constitution and the Members of Lok Sabha (Disqualification on ground of Defection) Rules, 1985. The decision of the Hon’ble Speaker, Lok Sabha dated 5 December, 2008 under the Tenth Schedule to the Constitution and the Members of Lok Sabha (Disqualification on Ground of Defection) Rules, 1985 is given as under :-
“BEFORE THE HON’BLE SPEAKER OF LOK SABHA
PARLIAMENT HOUSE, NEW DELHI.
IN THE MATTER OF:
Shri Santosh Gangwar, Chief Whip,
Bharatiya Janata Party,
2, Parliament House, New Delhi Petitioner
Versus
Shri Chandrabhan Bhaiya Singh,
Member of Parliament (Lok Sabha)
Delhi Address: 201, North Avenue, New Delhi – 10001.
Permanent Address: 249, Hansraj House, Wright Town,
District - Damoh (Madhya Pradesh) Respondent
Order:
1. This is an application filed by Shri Santosh Gangwar, Member of Parliament, Lok Sabha and Chief Whip, Bharatiya Janata Party against the Respondent Shri Chandrabhan Bhaiya Singh, Member of Lok Sabha, praying for the disqualification of the Respondent for being and continuing as a Member of the present Lok Sabha under the Tenth Schedule to the Constitution of India.
2. According to the Petitioner, the Respondent belonging to Bharatiya Janata Party (hereinafter referred to as BJP) was elected from Damoh parliamentary constituency of Madhya Pradesh in the election held in May 2004 on the BJP ticket and his name is entered in the list of BJP Members of Lok Sabha.
3. In the Petition, the Petitioner has stated that for two days’ Special Session of Lok Sabha, which was summoned for 21 and 22 July, 2008 to enable the Prime
Minister of India to seek the Vote of Confidence, the BJP on 18 July, 2008 had issued a Three Line Whip to all its Members in Lok Sabha, including the Respondent, to be present in the House on 21 and 22 July, 2008 and vote against the Motion of Confidence in the Union Council of Ministers.
4. It is contended by the Petitioner that in spite of the Whip having been issued to him by the BJP, on whose ticket the Respondent was elected to Lok Sabha, the Respondent abstained from voting in gross violation of the Party Whip and direction and as such he has incurred disqualification for being a Member of the Lok Sabha, and that this abstention from voting against the Party’s direction has not been condoned by the Party.
5. The Respondent filed a Reply on 5 September, 2008 in which he admitted the service of the Whip on him. He further stated that he was conscious about the various responsibilities of a Member of Parliament and that he understood the importance of voting on a particular occasion, particularly when Confidence Motion was the issue.
6. In his Reply, the Respondent further stated that he had reached Delhi on 20 July, 2008 and he had participated at a meeting of the BJP Parliamentary Party on the same date, and on 21 July, had attended the proceedings of the Parliament and that on 22 July, he had proceeded to attend the meeting of the Parliament, along with his wife, who did not want to leave him because of the bad condition of his health and that at about 3.45 p.m. on 22 July he “became unconscious while going to Parliament.”
7. In his Reply, the Respondent has further stated that due to his unconscious condition, he was taken to Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia Hospital but as there was no proper response, he was taken to the All-India Institute of Medical Sciences, but “due to the lethargic attitude of the officials, I was taken for medical facility to Aashlok Nursing Home.” He further stated that in Aashlok Nursing Home at about 4.45 p.m. he was admitted and he underwent several tests and that ultimately on 23 July, he was released from the Hospital.
8. He has further stated in his Reply that he came to know of the events of 22 July from his wife and he came to now that he was unconscious, was vomiting blood and
having high fever. He has stated that his wife asked his P.A. to inform the BJP leadership and Lok Sabha about his condition, but no evidence has been led to substantiate the same.
9. Therefore, according to the Respondent, because of the condition of his health, he could not attend the proceedings of Parliament on 22 July, 2008 and as such the provisions of the Tenth Schedule cannot be attracted in his case. He has further alleged that the BJP leadership has personal and political grudge against him and wanted to ruin his political career wholly on baseless grounds, which would be proved by the fact that he was expelled from the party on 23 July, 2008, on which date also the present petition has been filed.
10. Along with his reply, the Respondent has filed a copy of the letter alleged to have been sent by Shri Arun Jaitley to the Respondent, and copies of some medical papers and bills regarding his treatment at Aashlok Nursing Home, New Delhi.
11. I gave a personal hearing in the matter on 24 September, 2008 and again on 18 October, 2008. On the first day of hearing on 24 September, the Petitioner appeared in person and the Respondent by his lawyer, Shri Varun Thakur, who asked for adjournment on the ground that his Senior Counsel was not available. The Petitioner made certain submissions in which he mentioned about the receipt of the Whip by the Respondent and his abstention from voting and made comments on the reply filed by the Respondent. The learned lawyer of the Respondent repeated his prayer for adjournment stating his client was in a meeting of the District Vigilance and Evaluation Committee and his learned senior was busy elsewhere. However, at the end of the hearing, I directed that written arguments or submissions might be filed on behalf of the Respondent on or before 29 September, 2008 with a copy to the Petitioner. 12. On 29 September, 2008, written arguments were filed on behalf of the Respondent in which he mainly reiterated what is contained in his Reply and stated, inter alia, that “it is humbly submitted that no order can be passed without providing an opportunity of personal hearing to the Respondent as it would be against the concept of natural justice and also because, the hon. Speaker, would not be able to do justice to the Respondent.” The Respondent further submitted in his written arguments
that there are no grounds on the basis of which any relief could be given to the “BJP Chief Whip.”
13. I held the next personal hearing on 18 October, 2008 in which the Petitioner was present and the Respondent was also present along with his lawyer, Shri Varun Thakur. The Petitioner made submissions at the said hearing as would appear from the minutes of the meeting of that date. The learned lawyer of the Respondent then made his submissions. He referred to the discharge summary issued by the AashlokHospital regarding the condition of his client’s health. The Respondent himself also made some submissions. In the course of the hearing, the Respondent’s lawyer again asked for an opportunity to file a supplementary affidavit regarding some incidents which had taken place on 23, 24 and 25 July (dates subsequent to the date of voting) and to submit some papers to the Lok Sabha Office, requesting, “give me a last opportunity.” When almost the hearing was concluded, the lawyer again asked for adjournment on the ground that the Senior Counsel was out of station. I suggested that he could complete his submission and that if he wanted to file any written submissions, I was prepared to give him time. The Petitioner opposed the grant of any further time.
14. At the hearing on 18 October, 2008, I passed the following order:
“In today’s hearing, Hon. Shri Santosh Gangwar, the Petitioner as well as Hon. Shri Chandrabhan Singh, MP with his lawyer, Shri Varun Thakur, were present. After the submissions of Shri Santosh Gangwar, Shri Varun Thakur made some submissions and then asked for time on the ground that his senior lawyer is out of Delhi and that he wanted to file a further affidavit/petition. As a last opportunity, I permit the respondent to file a further affidavit/petition on or before 24th October, 2008 with a copy to the petitioner.
By way of last opportunity, I fix a hearing of the matter on 3rd November, 2008 at 5 p.m. for personal hearing. If any senior lawyer is not available on that date, the respondent will please communicate the said fact to the Office so that no further personal hearing will be given.
If any further affidavit/petition is filed by the respondent and a copy is given to the petitioner, the petitioner may file a further rejoinder or reply if he is so advised on or before 31st October, 2008.
If no request for personal hearing is made then no further hearing will be given. This may be noted that this will be the last opportunity.”
15. However, no written arguments were filed pursuant to the leave granted on 18 October, 2008. On 20 November, 2008, a further personal hearing was given, at which the Petitioner was present and Shri Ajit S. Bhasme, Senior Advocate appeared on behalf of the Respondent. By way of preliminary observation, Shri Ajit S. Bhasme asked for adjournment on the ground that “the client is in his constituency on account of Assembly elections. He is a political personality and he cannot stay away from there during the elections.” He wanted to file a supplementary affidavit to bring on record certain documents, including his client’s medical history from 2007, indicating the ailments from which the Respondent has suffered. The Petitioner strongly objected to the prayer for adjournment made by the Respondent’s lawyer. Ultimately to give a final opportunity to the Respondent, I allowed the Respondent’s lawyer time to file a written submission within a week as requested by him and I made the following order:
“I have not fixed the date of hearing. The written submission, if any, by the Respondent and hon. Member Shri Chandrabhan Singh may be filed on or before 27th of November with a copy to Mr. Gangwar. If any reply is there, they can give it with copies to each other and no more hearings in this regard.”
16. Pursuant to the leave granted, the Respondent filed his written submissions through his learned advocate Shri Varun Thakur on 27 November, 2008 in which the Respondent reiterated the submissions made by his lawyer on his behalf and also annexed a copy of the written opinion of Dr. Ashwani Chopra of Aashlok Nursing Home and a copy of the Discharge Report dated 17 March, 2007 issued by Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia Hospital. The petitioner filed a replication on 1 December 2008, in answer thereto.
17. Paragraph 2 (1) (b) of the Tenth Schedule to the Constitution provides that subject to the provisions of paragraphs 4 and 5, a Member of the House belonging to any political party shall be disqualified for being a Member of the House, if he votes or abstains from voting in such House contrary to any direction issued by the political party to which he belongs, without obtaining the prior permission of such political party or without obtaining the condonation of the political party for such voting or abstention within 15 days from the date of such voting or abstention. In the present case, the provisions of paragraphs 4 and 5 have no application.
18. In the decision of Dr. Mahachandra Prasad Singh Versus Chairman, Bihar Legislative Council and others (2004) 8 SCC 747, the hon. Supreme Court has been pleased to observe that under the Tenth Schedule, “the final authority to take a decision on the question of disqualification of a Member of the House vests with the Chairman or the Speaker of the House. It is to be noted that the Tenth Schedule does not confer any discretion on the Chairman or Speaker of the House. Their role is only in the domain of ascertaining the relevant facts. Once the facts gathered or placed show that a Member of the House has done any such act which comes within the purview of sub-paragraphs (1), (2) or (3) of paragraph 2 of the Tenth Schedule, the disqualification will apply and the Chairman or the Speaker of the House will have to make a decision to that effect.”
19. As stated before, I gave ample opportunity to the parties to present their respective cases at the personal hearing given to them. From the pleadings and the records of the personal hearing, it is clear that the Respondent had abstained from voting in the House on 22 July, 2008 contrary to the direction issued by his political party, the BJP, to which he belongs without obtaining the prior permission of his party or without obtaining the condonation of his party for such absention.
20. In my opinion, no reliable evidence has been placed before me to establish that the Respondent was, in fact, ill or that he was so ill that he could not attend the House on 22 July, 2008 to cast his vote. No attempt has been made to prove the documents of AashokHospital or any other Hospital nor any doctor has been called to prove that the Respondent was so ill that he could not attend the House. The discharge summary of Aashlok Hospital, even if it is taken into consideration, does not disclose any such illness which could prevent the Respondent from attending the House at
least at the time of voting. Further, the explanation given for not getting treatment at RMLHospital or at AIIMS, does not appear to be convincing. Significantly, neither the Respondent nor his wife who had supposedly accompanied him from hospital to hospital gave evidence in the matter.
21. After giving my anxious consideration to the materials before me, and considering the fact that the Respondent has admitted that he was served with the Party’s Whip and that he was fully aware of the direction given by the Party, it seems to me that he did abstain from voting against the Motion as directed by his Party. I regret that I am unable to accept the contention of the Respondent that he was not well enough to attend the proceedings of the House for the purpose of voting.
22. As Speaker, my primary obligation is to ascertain the relevant facts as has been held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. Having come to the conclusion that the Respondent abstained from voting contrary to the direction of his Party on 22 July, 2008, the act of the Respondent comes within the purview of paragraph 2 (1) (b) of Tenth Schedule to the Constitution and I decide accordingly.
23. Thus, I hold that the Respondent, Shri Chandrabhan Bhaiya Singh, an elected Member of the Lok Sabha from Damoh constituency of Madhya Pradesh has incurred disqualification under paragraph 2 (1) (b) of the Tenth Schedule to the Constitution of India, by his abstention from casting his vote against the Confidence Motion moved by the Hon’ble Prime Minister of India at the voting held on 22 July, 2008.
24. Thus, the Respondent stands disqualified for continuing as a Member of the Fourteenth Lok Sabha and it is declared that his seat has fallen vacant.
Sd/-
NEW DELHI ; SOMNATH CHATTERJEE
Dated the 5 December, 2008 SPEAKER, LOK SABHA”
VJAS earlier urged congress president smt.sonia Gandhi not to give tainted M.P. of yavtmal whose disqualification is pending after speaker committee recommendation to disqualify him but it was shocling to know that smt.sonia Gandhi has keeping her promise and giving congress tickets to the tainted M.P. who betrayed their party whip to save UPA Govt.on 28th July 2008 even though they are disqualified for life to hold office of public profit.
Hence VJAS has now urged election commission to send list of disqualified candidates under the Tenth Schedule to the Constitution and the Members of Lok Sabha (Disqualification on ground of Defection) Rules, 1985 as congress has planed to give around 8 tainted M.P. as per media report.
“it’s unfortunate as corruption and malpractices of M.P.s are being given legitimate honor, we will take this issue at all the forum to stop it” kishore tiwari of VJAS informed in press note today.
2)Mr. A.K. Anthony – AICC General Secretary Incharge of Maharashtra,
3) Mr. Ahmed Patel, Political Advisor to AICC, President,
4)Mr. Mallikarjun Kharge, AICC Observer for Maharashtra,
Reg :Lok Sabha Election – 2009 :
Maharashtra State – Yavatmal / Washim Lok Sabha Constituency.
Sub :Parliamentary Committee Report found Mr. Harisingh Rathod guilty of Anti Defection Law : Report submitted onDisqualification Petitionpending before Hon’ble Speaker – Lok Sabha against 14th Lok Sabha Member – Harisingh N. Rathod.
Ref :Our demand not to nominate Mr. Harisingh N. Rathod as Congress Candidate from Yavatmal – Washim L.S. Constituency of Maharashtra State because now disqualification of Mr. Rathod from holding office of M.P. is almost certain.
Hon’ble Madam / Sirs,
Further to our petition before Hon’ble Speaker of Lok Sabha requesting him for early decision in the matter of disqualification petition pending before speaker against Sh. Harisingh N. Rathod, then MP of 14th Lok Sabha, we have come to know that Parliamentary Committee of Lok Sabha has already found Mr. Rathod guilty of Anti Defection Law and its report has already been submitted to the Office of the Hon’ble Speaker.
Now, as per the provisions of Constitution of India under Article 102(2)
“A person shall be disqualified for being a member of either House of Parliament if he is so disqualified under the Tenth Schedule.”
Similarly, now since in the petition filed by BJP Parliamentary Party against Mr. Rathod under Tenth Schedule of the Constitution of India, the Parliamentary Committee has found him guilty of the offences committed by Mr. Rathod, it is likely that Mr. Rathod will be disqualified for being a Member of the either House of Parliament as he is being disqualified under Tenth Schedule.
The cause of action for disqualification was arose in July, 2008 when Mr. Rathod defied the whip and remained absent.The disqualification petition is under process and his resignation from Lok Sabha on 05-01-2009 will not have any bearing upon the outcome of the disqualification petition which has to be decided on merit, in view of the settled law in the following cases :-
Ravi S. Naik Vs Union of India, AIR 1994 SC 1558 / (1994) Sup (2) SCC
S. R. Bommai and others Vs Union on India and others, AIR 1994 SC 1918 / (1994) 3 SCC 1
Kihota Hollahan Vs Zachilhu and others, AIR 1993 SC 412 / (1992) 1 SCC 309
Mayawati Vs Markandeya Chand & others, (1998) 7 SCC 517
Now as Mr.Rathod is seeking reelection from Yavatmal-Washim Parliamentary Constituency once again as the proposed candidate of Indian National Congress which he has joined recently, the pending petition filed under Tenth Schedule by BJP against Mr. Rathod will have direct bearing upon the candidature and/or the eligibility of Mr. Rathod as either contesting parliament election and/or from becoming Member of Parliament, even if he is elected in the meantime.
In view of above, you are kindly requested to kindly take note of this and not to waste energy on the candidate who is likely to be disqualified in the pending disqualification petition.
VJASrequest Speaker of 14th Lok Sabha for early decision in the matter of disqualification petition under 10th Schedule filed by BJP Parliamentary party against ‘vote for cash’ M.P. Harisingh Nasaru Rathodand request to keep ethical standard of Parliamentary Democracy
Ref: VJAS/LS-PIL/WP-57/ 2009PRESS-NOTE19.03.2009.
VJASrequest Speaker of 14th Lok Sabha for early decision in the matter of disqualification petition under 10th Schedule filed by BJP Parliamentary party against ‘vote for cash’ M.P. Harisingh Nasaru Rathodand request to keep ethical standard of Parliamentary Democracy
Nagpur- March 19, 2009
As congress president smt.sonia Gandhi has decided to give her party loksabha candidature to tainted‘vote for cash’ M.P. Harisingh Nasaru Rathodfrom Yavatmal-Washim loksabha constituency as there is no place for morality in ethics in caste base corrupt Indian politics , Kishor Tiwari President of Vidarbha Janandolan Samiti (VJAS) now moved to Hon’ble Shri Somnath Chatterjee,Hon’ble Speaker of 14th Lok Sabha who is yet to take his final decision in the metter of disqualification petition under 10th Schedule filed by BJP Parliamentary party against ‘vote for cash’ M.P. Harisingh Nasaru Rathodand request to keep ethical standard of Parliamentary Democracy as per statutoryobligation under Indian constitution .
Inrequest letter VJAS activist said that Mr. Harisingh Nasaru Rathod was the elected Member of 14th Lok Sabha from Yavatmal Parliamentary constitutency of MaharashtraState. He was elected as an official candidate of BJP in the General Election to Lok Sabha – 2004. It is alleged that Mr. Harisingh Nasaru Rathod, 14th Lok Sabha MP has acted against the whip of the BJP Parliamentary party at the time of voting in Lok Sabha in the month of July 2008. Accordingly, a petition under the Lok Sabha Member disqualification Rules framed under 10th Schedule of the Constitution of India has been filed by BJP for disqualification of said MP on the grounds contended in the said petition pending before Your Honour.
It has been futher alleged by the BJP parliamentary party that the said expelled BJP M.P. Harisingh Rathod who had last year defied his party whip and abstained from voting on the confidence motion in the Lok Sabha and disqualification petition alleging his intentional abstain as ‘vote for cash’ shall likely to face disqualification as reasons given by Harisingh Rathod that he said "I came back from Parliament yesterday at around one pm to take my diabetes injection. Suddenly, on the way my sugar level dropped because of which I became drowsy and was rushed to KukrejaHospital in RajouriGarden (about 15 km from Parliament). I was in the ICU and was finally discharged at around nine in the evening. My phones were switched off and no one was allowed in the ICU. I was under tension since I had not made up my mind about the vote. It is nice that the government has won and I would have also voted for the government only," As per the BJP petition claimed that the reasons given by Mr. Rathod are not justified as his illness in the house was not even reported in the parliament hospital hence his version is fabricated .
On legal aspects of the issue VJAS leader informed speaker that as Mr. Rathod having committed the offence as per the law of Anti Defection has now joined Indian National Congress and seekingparty ticket of INC, we in letter to Smt. Sonia Gandhi, President of INC requested her on the ground of high morality and in order to keep high standards ethical balance in Indian parliament system intact ,she should not promote the practices adopted by the Great Betrayers- Aya aur Gaya type M.P. Harisingh Rathod as even if congress culture allows such type of corrupt elements to exists with reorganisation but society at large will reject them at last in the election hence congress should refrain from such unholy act .
Kishore tiwari humbly prayed the speaker of loksabha “Hon’ble sir, we would like to draw your kind attention that Rathod's defection was a shocker to the common voters and the citizens atlarge who have faith & belief in the democracy and also for BJP party. Mr. Rathod’s alleged offence of violating the Anti Defection laws of land and the Constitutional provisions contended in 10th Schedule of the Constitution of India cannot overide the resignation tender by Mr. Rathod later on in the month of January, 2009. Because the cause of action for the petition of disqualification filed against Mr. Rathod was arosed in the month of July, 2008 when he committed offence under the provisions of Anti Defection laws and as such his resignation is nothing to do with the crime committed. He must be punished for the crime committed by him, if he is really guilty. As per the provisions of Article 102 (2) of Constitution of India, any Member of Parliament who faces disqualification under 10th Schedule of the Constitution, cannot be eligible for becoming of Parliament and /or contesting the election to parliament. Now as Mr.Rathod may be seeking reelection from Yavatmal parliamentary constitutency once again as candidate of Indian National Congress which he has joined recently, it is mandatory of the part of Your Honour to decide the pending petition filed under 10th Schedule by BJP against Mr. Rathod because its outcome will have bearing upon the candidature and/or the eligibility of Mr. Rathod as either contesting parliament election and/or from becoming Member of Parliament. Therefore, the pending issue be decided independent of facts without being governed by the onward acts of Mr. Rathod tendering resignation from parliament.
This AayaRam-GayaRam tendency of the political leader is the blot on the parliamentary democracy and to teach lesson to such defectors, the parliament has enacted the statutory provisions of which Your Honour is the custodian and presiding authority. We strongly feel that the provisions of the law must be implemented so that the common man will not lose faith in the Rule of Law and the high values of parliament democracy.”
In light of the above, in order to protect the high moral standard of parliamentary democracy, it is the need of hour to give punishment to such persons who have violated the law of Anti Defection and brought disrespect to the parliamentary democracy. Hence the petition filed by BJP Parliamentary party seeking the disqualification and other penal action against Mr. Harisingh Rathod has to be decided immediately because the Anti Defection Law of 10th Schedule also mandates disqualification of the guilty member under Article 102(2) of the Constitution of India from contesting election forever, in the eventin present case, if it is found that Mr. Harisingh Rathod is guilty of violation of the provisions of the law governing such defection as a Member of Lok Sabha.
In view of above, we as the soldier - custodian of parliamentary democracy and high moral standards coupled therewith, humbly pray for early decision in thematter of disqualification petition pending against Mr. Haribhau Rathod, since its outcome will have direct bearing upon his nomination as a candidate of forthcoming Lok Sabha election,tiwari added.
it is demand of every citizen of India that the pending disqualification petitions against the Members of Parliament - Lok Sabha like Mr. Harisingh Rathod may please be expedited & decided immediately in the interest of justice, equity and fair play to uphold the high standard of parliamentary democracy in which every citizen has faith & belief,tiwari urged the speaker .
please arrange publish this press release
Thanking you,
Yours faithfully,
For VIDARBHA JANANDOLAN SAMITI
PRESIDENT –
KISHORE TIWARI,
CC :Her Highness Hon’ble President of India, Rashtrapati Bhavan,
Govt. of India, New Delhi.
Hon’ble Chief Election Commissioner & Other Commissioners,
Election Commission of India, New Delhi.
Hon’ble Shri Somnath Chatterjee, Hon’ble Speaker of 14th Lok Sabha, Parliament House, New Delhi.
Sub :Request for early decision in the matter of disqualification petition filed by BJP Parliamentary party against ‘vote for cash’ M.P. Haribhau Rathod and to keep ethical standard of Parliamentary Democracy
Ref :Disqualification Petition pending against Lok Sabha M.P. Haribhau Rathod.
Hon’ble Sir,
I am President of Vidarbha Janandolan Samiti (VJAS), a movement of citizens working for the cause of poors who believe in parliamentary democracy and humbly beg to submit as under that :
1.Mr. Haribhau Nasru Rathod is the elected Member of 14th Lok Sabha from Yavatmal Parliamentary constitutency of Maharashtra State. He was elected as an official candidate of BJP in the General Election to Lok Sabha – 2004.
2.It is alleged that Mr. Haribhau Nasru Rathod, 14th Lok Sabha MP has acted against the whip of the BJP Parliamentary party. Accordingly, a petition has been filed by BJP for disqualification of said MP on the grounds contended in the said petition pending before Your Honour.
3.It has been alleged by the BJP parliamentary party that the said expelled BJP M.P. Haribhau Rathod who had last year defied his party whip and abstained from voting on the confidence motion in the Lok Sabha and disqualification petition alleging his intentional abstain as ‘vote for cash’ and likely to face disqualification as reasons given by Haribhau Rathod that he said "I came back from Parliament yesterday at around one pm to take my diabetes injection. Suddenly, on the way my sugar level dropped because of which I became drowsy and was rushed to Kukreja Hospital in Rajouri Garden (about 15 km from Parliament). I was in the ICU and was finally discharged at around nine in the evening. My phones were switched off and no one was allowed in the ICU. I was under tension since I had not made up my mind about the vote. It is nice that the government has won and I would have also voted for the government only,"
4.As Mr. Rathod has now joined Indian National Congress and seekingparty ticket of INC, we in letter to Smt. Sonia Gandhi requested her on the ground of high morality and in order to keep high standards ethical balance in Indian parliament system intact ,she should not promote the practices adopted by the Great Betrayers- Aya aur Gaya type M.P. Haribhau Rathod as even if congress culture allows such type of corrupt elements to exists with reorganisation but society at large will reject them at last in the election hence congress should refrain from such unholy act .
5.Hon’ble sir, we would like to draw your kind attention that Rathod's defection was a shocker to the common voters and the citizens atlarge who have faith & belief in the democracy and also for BJP party. Mr. Rathod may be seeking reelection from Yavatmal parliamentary constitutency once again as candidate of Indian National Congress which he has joined recently.
This AayaRam-GayaRam tendency of the political leader is the blot on the parliamentary democracy and to teach lesson to such defectors, the parliament has enacted the statutory provisions of which Your Honour is the custodian and presiding authority.
6.In light of the development taking place, in order to protect the high moral standard of parliamentary democracy, it is the need of hour to give punishment to such persons who have violated the law of Anti Defection and brought disrespect to the parliamentary democracy. Hence the petition filed by BJP Parliamentary party seeking the disqualification and other penal action against Mr. Haribhau Rathod has to be decided immediately because the Anti Defection Law also mandates disqualification from contesting election for 6 years, in the event if it is found that Mr. Haribhau Rathod is guilty of violation of the provisions of the law governing such defection as a Member of Lok Sabha.
In view of above, we as the soldier - custodian of parliamentary democracy and high moral standards coupled therewith, humbly pray for early decision in thematter of disqualification petition pending against Mr. Haribhau Rathod, since its outcome will have direct bearing upon his nomination as a candidate of forthcoming Lok Sabha election.
In such circumstances it is demand of every citizen of India that the pending disqualification petitions against the Members of Parliament - Lok Sabha like Mr. Haribhau Rathod may please be expedited & decided immediately in the interest of justice, equity and fair play to uphold the high standard of parliamentary democracy in which every citizen has faith & belief.
We hope, for the reason explained here in above,Your Honour willarrange to deliver the most expected judgement in the case of Mr. Haribhau Rathod pending before Your Honour, so that the faith & belief of common man in the parliamentary democracycan be strengthen by your valuable decision / judgement.
VIDARBHA JANANDOLAN SAMITI
PRESIDENT –
KISHORE TIWARI,
B.E. (Mech.Engg.), M.B.A., LL.B., M.A. (Pub. & Admn.), M.A. Sociology,
M.I.S. (USA), Fellow - I.E.H., Fellow – Institution of Engineers (India)-
CHARTERED ENGINEER
BACKGROUND :
Vidarbha Jan Andolan Samiti is fighting for the cause of common man since 1998.
Vidarbha Jan Andolan Samiti is constantly pursuing its battle on various fronts like –
a.Administrative
b.Judicial
c.Quasi-judicial
d.Legislative
e.Parliamentary
f.International levels
PUBLIC ISSUES :
1.Farmers suicides
2.Mal nutrition of Tribals.
3.Plights of Rural economy
4.Drinking water
5.Right to Food
6.Right to Education
7.Problems of Minorities
8.Issue of Separate Statehood to Vidarbha
THE EFFECT OF MOVEMENT :
The continued follow up and Jan Andolans of Vidarbha Jan Andolan Samiti has resulted in many success broadly classified as –
1.Waiver of small farmers crop loans
2.interest remission to marginal farmers
3.right to food to the lacs of tribals.
4.Primary Education to every rural students.
5.Farmers packages
6.BPL benefits to thousands of poor families.
7.Justice to unwed mothers
