New Delhi, Nov 22 (PTI) In a relief to Chief Minister Sukhvinder Singh Sukhu-led Himachal Pradesh government, the Supreme Court on Friday stayed the initiation of disqualification proceedings against six MLAs who were appointed as chief parliamentary secretaries in 2023.

A bench of Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar stayed the findings of the Himachal Pradesh High Court that held as illegal and unconstitutional the protection from disqualification granted to the MLAs for being chosen as chief parliamentary secretary (CPS) and parliamentary secretary (PS) under a state law and cleared the way for initiation of disqualification proceedings as MLAs for holding office of profit.

Following the stay of the top court, though the six MLAs will not hold the post of CPS, they will not be disqualified as members of the legislative assembly.

The bench said it was not staying the entire November 13 judgement of the high court but only paragraph 50 of the verdict that paved way for the initiation of disqualification proceedings of the MLAs.

“Till the next date of hearing, no further proceedings in pursuant to paragraph 50 of the impugned judgement shall take place,” the bench directed while issuing notice on the state government’s plea challenging the high court’s verdict.

Paragraph 50 of the 33-page high court verdict stated, “Protection granted to such appointment to the office of Chief Parliamentary Secretary/or Parliamentary Secretary as per Section 3 with Clause (d) of Himachal Pradesh Legislative Assembly Members (Removal of Disqualifications) Act, 1971 is also declared illegal and unconstitutional and thus, claim of such protection under above referred Section 3(d) is inconsequential. Natural consequences and legal implications whereof shall follow forthwith in accordance with law.” Section 3 with Clause (d) of the 1971 law grants protection to the MLAs from being disqualified for being chosen to the office of CPS or PS.

The top court further made it clear to the Sukhu government to not make any further appointment of chief parliamentary secretaries or parliamentary secretaries saying “it will be contrary to law”.

The bench sought the response of BJP leader Kalpana Devi, who has moved the high court challenging the appointment of chief parliamentary secretaries along with several other BJP leaders.

The top court posted the hearing after a month while granting two weeks to Devi to file her response and the state government to file its rejoinder, respectively.

The bench tagged the state government’s plea filed through advocate Sugandha Anand along with other pending petitions in the top court and observed that contrary views have been taken by different high courts.

Sukhu appointed the six chief parliamentary secretaries — Sanjay Awasthi, the MLA from the Arki assembly constituency, Sunder Singh from Kullu, Ram Kumar from Doon, Mohan Lal Barakta from Rohru, Ashish Butail from Palampur and Kishori Lal from Baijnath — on January 8, 2023, ahead of his cabinet expansion.

The high court noted that unlike the MLAs, CPS and parliamentary secretaries had access to official files to participate in the decision-making process of the government. They have been also allotted departments by the chief minister and have been attached with the cabinet ministers like deputy or junior ministers.

During the hearing, a battery of senior lawyers including Kapil Sibal, Abhishek Manu Singhvi, Anand Sharma and Advocate General Anup Rattan, appeared for the state government and said contrary views were taken by different high courts on the issue of appointment of CPS and parliamentary secretaries.

“Some have quashed it and some like Chhattisgarh High Court have upheld it. These matters from Chhattisgarh, West Bengal are pending here. Please issue notice and tag it along with those matters,” argued Sibal.

Senior advocate Maninder Singh, appearing for the BJP leader vehemently opposed the issuance of notice and said that Justice Khanna, during his tenure in the Delhi High Court, had dealt with the issue.

He said the creation of office of CPS was beyond the legislative competence of the state legislature and the apex court had struck down a state law in a similar case from Manipur.

The bench said, “The thumb rule is that when we admit appeal, the status quo has to be maintained. We will not allow the process (disqualification) to go on in the meanwhile.” CJI Khanna pointed out to senior advocate Maninder Singh that there was no discussion on the reasons to strike down the protection from disqualification as MLAs in the high court.

“See first there was a legislation, it was struck down. Then they came out with second legislation, which says this would not amount to an office of profit, but it was also struck down, there is no discussion on the issue in the judgement,” the CJI said.

The high court declared the Himachal Pradesh Parliamentary Secretaries (Appointment, Salaries, Allowances, Powers, Privileges and Amenities) Act, 2006 as void.

It was for the second time that the appointments of the CPS and PS have been quashed in the hill state.

On August 18, 2005, the high court had quashed the appointments of eight chief parliamentary secretaries and four parliamentary secretaries. PTI MNL AMK