Hyderabad High Court: The Court dismissed a writ petition seeking a writ of quo warranto against the respondent to show cause of his authority in holding the office of the Chief Minister of the State of Andhra Pradesh.
The case of the petitioner is that proper statutory guidelines have not been followed by the Governor when inviting the respondent to form a government, therefore, the respondent has no rightful authority to hold the position. The Andhra Pradesh Reorganization Act, 2014 under Section 19(1) states that allocation can be made for only the sitting members of the Legislative Assembly of Andhra Pradesh. The petitioner alleges that this requirement has not been followed by the Governor.
The Court is of the view that the writ petition has been filed to abuse the process of the Court as it has been filed 3 years and 2 months after the appointment of the respondent. Further, the similar process was carried out in the State of Telangana too by the Governor in accordance with Article 164(1) of the Constitution. The petitioner has challenged only one appointment and not both. The Court reasoned that there was no one who fits the criteria of sitting member of Legislative Assembly on the given date due to the Presidential Proclamation. Therefore, the decision taken by the Governor cannot be termed as illegal. On these grounds the writ petition was dismissed. [Pakkala Suribabu v. State of Andhra Pradesh, 2017 SCC OnLine Hyd 271, decided on 23.08.2017]
