Minister status not same as Council of Ministers, HC told

Tribune News Service

Chandigarh, September 18

Just after a week after the appointments six MLAs as advisers to the Chief Minister were challenged, the Punjab and Haryana High Court today did not intervene in the matter and adjourned the hearing to December 9.

At the very outset, Advocate-General Atul Nanda told the Bench of Chief Justice Krishna Murari and Justice Arun Palli that the apprehension of the petitioner regarding the “swearing-in ceremony” was ill-founded. Elaborating, Nanda added that there was no scheduled swearing-in ceremony.

The submission came in response to prayer clause in the petition, wherein the petitioner had sought interim stay on the swearing-in ceremony to be held on April 21. Nanda also appraised the court that there was a difference between minister being part of Council of Ministers and a person being given the status of minister. Quoting an example, Nanda said when retired district judge was appointed to a tribunal, his conditions of service were set out to be similar to a High Court judge. But this would under no circumstance make a retired district judge a High Court judge.

The petition was filed a day after the Punjab Government appointed six MLAs as advisers to the Chief Minister. One of the grounds for challenging the impugned orders is its issuance by an authority not constitutionally competent.