Friday, February 18 2005 15:54 Hrs (IST) - World Time -

New Delhi: The Centre today (Feb 18, 2005) assured the Supreme Court reiterating Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's statement that it would initiate a debate in Parliament on the issue of inclusion of "tainted" persons in the Union Council of Ministers and the Court dismissed a petition on this issue.

Solicitor General G E Vahanvati, appearing for the Union Government, gave the assurance to a three-judge bench comprising Justice N Santosh Hegde, Justice S B Sinha and Justice A K Mathur and said the "issue was clearly within the domain of Parliament to discuss and debate" and not for the Courts to decide.

The Bench recorded the assurance of the Solicitor General and dismissed the petition filed by one Manoj Narula seeking review of the apex Court's order dismissing his PIL alleging that inclusion of tainted Minister's breached the terms of oath given in Schedule III of the Constitution.

The petition, which challenged the inclusion of Laloo Prasad, Jai Prakash Yadav, M A Fatmi and Mohd Taslimuddin in the Council of Ministers, said the Ministers were required to carry out important constitutional functions and should be of impeccable integrity.

The Court on July 16, 2004 had dismissed the petition terming it as "premature" as Parliament was seized of the matter and was debating the issue.

However, it had issued notice to the Centre on the Narula's petition seeking review of the July 16 order on the ground that Parliament did not debate on the issue of 'tainted Ministers.

The Centre, which assured the Court about its desire to initiate a debate on the issue of tainted Ministers in Parliament, in its affidavit before the Supreme Court had maintained that it was the prerogative of the Prime Minister to choose as to who should be in his Council of Ministers.

There was no "limitation or restriction" in the Constitution to bar MPs from being included in the Council of Ministers, it said and added, "Once a person is a Member of Parliament, he is entitled to be in the Council of Ministers if the Prime Minister so decides."

"The President would have no option but to appoint as Prime Minister the person who commands the support of the majority in the House. Equally, the Prime Minister has the discretion to select his Council of Ministers, and persons so selected are required to be appointed by the President as being part of the Council of Ministers," the Centre had said.

Responding to this, counsel for the petitioner Anil Kumar Jha asked whether a person accused of waging war against the nation, during the pendency of the case before the trial court, could contest election and in the event of becoming an MP be eligible for becoming a Minister in the Union Cabinet.

Even as the Bench was terming this as a hypothetical question, Laloo Prasad's counsel B B Singh asked as to what the petitioner meant by 'tainted'. Singh said Prasad was not convicted in any case to be termed as 'tainted'.

However, the Bench recording the assurance dismissed the petition.