EC commences listening to of mining lease case towards Soren, BJP seeks Jharkhand CM’s disqualification

By PTI

NEW DELHI: The authorized counsel for the BJP on Tuesday sought earlier than the Election Commission disqualification of Jharkhand Chief Minister Hemant Soren as an MLA over a mining lease case, asserting he violated a provision of the election legislation by extending himself a favour with regard to a authorities contract whereas in workplace.

Former Jharkhand Chief Minister Raghubar Das of the BJP has accused Soren of “misusing his post” to get “in-principle approval” for a stone quarrying lease in his title in Ranchi district regardless of holding the mining portfolio, an obvious occasion of corruption and battle of curiosity.

The Election Commission of India had in May despatched a discover to Soren looking for his feedback on the difficulty.

It has been alleged that proudly owning the lease violated Section 9A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, which offers with “Disqualification for Government contracts, etc.”

Soren’s authorized crew, nonetheless, maintained that Section 9A of the Representation of the People Act doesn’t apply to the case and cited a Supreme Court ruling.

Initiating the arguments earlier than the Election Commission, which works as a quasi-judicial physique in such instances, the BJP — the petitioner — contended Soren deserved to be disqualified as a result of he because the chief minister gave himself a lease beneath his signature.

Briefing reporters concerning the arguments put forth by the BJP, certainly one of its counsel Kumar Harsh mentioned it’s a case for disqualification and entails corruption.

Following a reference from the Jharkhand governor, the EC had in May issued a discover to Soren beneath Section 9A of the Representation of the People Act which offers with the disqualification of a lawmaker for presidency contracts.

“A person shall be disqualified if, and for so long as, there subsists a contract entered into by him in the course of his trade or business with the appropriate government for the supply of goods to, or for the execution of any works undertaken by, that government,” the part states.

According to Kumar Harsh, Soren’s aspect sought extra time to conclude the arguments.

“Expressing displeasure, the Commission asked them to begin arguments. They argued their stand for barely two minutes and again sought time,” he mentioned.

His declare was, nonetheless, rejected by S Okay Mendiratta, one of many authorized representatives of Soren.

Mendiratta has served with the Election Commission for greater than 50 years.

“We did not seek time. We said they took two hours, so we would also like to take two or two-and-a-half hours. They (EC) said we will hear your side on the next date,” Mendiratta informed reporters.

He mentioned the respondent (Soren) is of the view that it’s a choice of the Supreme Court that in such instances Section 9A shouldn’t be relevant.

“EC will have to decide … They said it is a case for disqualification. But we said 9A does not apply,” he asserted.

The ballot panel would later talk the following date of listening to within the case.

Soren was earlier granted two extensions by the EC to start listening to.