Sunday, March 20 2005 17:55 Hrs (IST) - World Time -

New Delhi: Lok Sabha Speaker Somnath Chatterjee today (March 20, 2005) said the Supreme Court on Jharkhand Assembly issue, which created a controversy, could not be cited as a precedent.

Replying to a question at a press conference at the end of a day-long conference of Presiding Officers of the Legislative Bodies here in the backdrop of the Jharkhand order, Chatterjee said the apex court's order on March 9, 2005 could not be a precedent as it was an interim order passed ex-parte.

"I can't expect the Supreme Court to pass an unreasoned judgement. I am sure it will not be treated as the law of the land. It is not a law declared by the Supreme Court as law of the land. It is just an interim order", he said.

Asked about some of the questions he said had arisen out of the order on Jharkhand like whether the Protem Speaker attracted the contempt of Supreme Court or whether the Jharkhand Assembly members were liable to follow the order and what was the remedy, he said these questions only showed that the apex court order was "unimplementable".

"The solution to the Jharkhand matter came not from the Court's order but by the executive decision of the Prime Minister," he claimed.

In his inaugural address, the Speaker posed a series of questions on the apex court order. "One would like to know that if the Court considered that there was a violation of the order, would the Speaker or the members of the Legislature be held guilty of the contempt of the Supreme Court?"

"Would the judiciary have been able to deal with such a situation? Whether the Speaker could be summoned before the Supreme Court for having exercised his authority under the Constitution? Would the Speaker be liable to submit to the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court?

Chatterjee also sought to know, "How would the members of Legislature be treated for alleged contempt of the Court? Would the Supreme Court have directed the arrest and detention of the Speaker and members of the Jharkhand Legislature?

"Can a Speaker of any Legislature be held answerable for not being able to transact the proceedings of the house if the members of the Legislature indulge in indiscipline only with a view to disturbing the proceedings?"