New Delhi: A year after the Supreme Court sought the views of the centre and state governments on the controversial issue of appointment of tainted persons as ministers, six of them have failed to respond.

A Bench headed by Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan granted them another opportunity to file their response on the issue which also included a question whether the President or Governor have residuary power to refuse oath to such persons.

The apex court was informed that among the state governments which are yet to respond to the nine questions on the contentious issue are Uttar Pradesh, Maharashtra, Rajasthan, Kerala, Tamil Nadu and Orissa.

The order seeking their reply was issued on February 19, 2007. The petition has already been referred to a five-judge Constitution Bench, which will deliberate on questions raised by senior advocate Rakesh Dwivedi, who is assisting the court as amicus curiae in the matter.

Important questions of Constitutional law which have been drafted by Dwivedi for judicial scrutiny included whether the oath of office subscribed by the President and Prime Minister by necessary implication oblige them not to appoint chargesheeted persons as ministers.

Another contention raised was whether Prime Minister and Chief Minister's discretion to appoint ministers put fetters on courts. This prevented courts from emphasising that fitness to office and eliminating those charged with crimes amounting to moral turpitude be not appointed as ministers in the interest of democracy.

The amicus curiae has raised questions to assist the court on a Public Interest Litigation which has challenged induction of MPs with criminal background as ministers in the Union Cabinet.
Source : PTI