The Supreme Court on Tuesday refused to entertain a plea challenging the Karnataka government's decision to grant cabinet rank to Members of Legislative Assembly (MLAs) and Members of Legislative Council (MLCs). A bench comprising Justices B R Gavai and Prashant Kumar Mishra dismissed the petition, stating that it lacked merit.
Petitioner's Argument
Senior advocate K Parameshwar, appearing for the petitioner, argued that the state government's decision was unconstitutional as it violated the principles of parliamentary democracy. He contended that granting cabinet rank to MLAs and MLCs who are not ministers would create an unnecessary burden on the state exchequer. Parameshwar further submitted that the department has no money of its own as it comes from the consolidated fund of India.
Government's Stand
The Karnataka government defended its decision, stating that it was aimed at recognizing the contributions of senior legislators and ensuring their effective participation in policy-making. The government argued that the move would not result in any additional financial burden as the rank would be honorary in nature.
Court's Observation
The Supreme Court observed that the petition raised no substantial question of law and was based on hypothetical assumptions. The bench noted that the state government has the discretion to decide the protocol and rank of its legislators, and such decisions are not subject to judicial review unless they violate constitutional provisions. The court also remarked that the petitioner failed to demonstrate any direct or indirect financial loss to the public exchequer.
Background
The Karnataka government had recently issued an order granting cabinet rank to all MLAs and MLCs, sparking a political controversy. The opposition parties accused the ruling party of misusing public funds for political gains. However, the government maintained that the decision was taken to enhance the efficiency of the legislature and to ensure that legislators are treated with due respect.
The Supreme Court's dismissal of the plea has effectively upheld the state government's decision, bringing an end to the legal challenge. The matter is now considered closed, and the government is expected to proceed with the implementation of the order.
