New Delhi -°C
Today in New Delhi, India

Jan 18, 2020-Saturday
-°C

Humidity
-

Wind
-

Select city

Metro cities - Delhi, Mumbai, Chennai, Kolkata

Other cities - Noida, Gurgaon, Bengaluru, Hyderabad, Bhopal , Chandigarh , Dehradun, Indore, Jaipur, Lucknow, Patna, Ranchi

Saturday, Jan 18, 2020
Home / Delhi News / Delhi High court dismisses plea challenging House session, imposes Rs 50,000 cost

Delhi High court dismisses plea challenging House session, imposes Rs 50,000 cost

The court’s order comes on a plea filed by advocate Prashant Umrao who had contended the two-day session was the first one of 2017 and ought to have commenced after the L-G’s address, which was not done.

delhi Updated: Apr 10, 2019 06:05 IST
HT Correspondent
HT Correspondent
Hindustan Times, New Delhi
The high court in its oral order referred to a Supreme Court judgment that laid down the distinction between the start of an adjourned session and commencement of a fresh one.
The high court in its oral order referred to a Supreme Court judgment that laid down the distinction between the start of an adjourned session and commencement of a fresh one.(Mint )
         

Terming it as “frivolous ”, the Delhi High Court on Tuesday dismissed a plea challenging the legality of a two-day winter session of the Delhi Legislative Assembly held on January 17-18, 2017 on the grounds that the session commenced without an opening address by the lieutenant-governor (L-G).

Justice Vibhu Bakhru said, “nobody was suffering on account of the L-G not addressing the session. Only persons who suffered were those (litigants) who had to wait for this frivolous petition to be heard before their matter was taken up”. It imposed a cost of Rs 50,000 on the petitioner. “This court is of the view that this petition warrants cost,” the court said, adding the amount be deposited with the advocates’ welfare trust within two weeks.

The court’s order comes on a plea filed by advocate Prashant Umrao who had contended the two-day session was the first one of 2017 and ought to have commenced after the L-G’s address, which was not done.

But the court said the proceedings were actually a resumption of the adjourned Winter Session of 2016 and not a fresh one.

Advocate Ramesh Singh, standing counsel for the Delhi government, said a cost be imposed on the petitioner for wasting the court’s time.

The high court in its oral order referred to a Supreme Court judgment that laid down the distinction between the start of an adjourned session and commencement of a fresh one.

During the brief proceedings, the Assembly, represented by advocate Prabhsahay Kaur, told the court that an address by the L-G was not required as the two-day proceedings were only a resumption of the winter session, which had been adjourned sine die on November 15, 2016.

When the two-day session of the Assembly had commenced, leader of opposition Vijender Gupta had objected, saying that by not inviting L-G Anil Baijal to address the “first session of the year”, the government had “violated and misused” rules. Speaker Ram Niwas Goel had rejected the charge, saying it was not a new session but was part of the 2016 Winter Session.