Manipur Congress seeks readability from Governor on Assembly standing

President’s Rule was imposed in Manipur on February 13 this 12 months, following the resignation of Nongthombam Biren Singh as Chief Minister on February 9, amid the continuing ethnic battle within the State.

In a memorandum submitted to the Governor, State Congress president Ok. Meghachandra Singh questioned whether or not the twelfth Manipur Legislative Assembly “continues to be alive or already lifeless” or “constitutionally deemed to be dissolved from midnight” of February 11, two days previous to the imposition of President’s Rule.

“The final sitting of the 60-member House was held on August 12, 2024, and based on Article 174(1) of the Constitution of India, the following sitting should have been mandatorily held on or earlier than February 11. However, Mr. Biren Singh resigned because the Chief Minister on February 9, and on that day, the Governor declared his January 24 order summoning the Assembly for February 11 to be null and void,” mentioned Congress spokesperson and advocate Ningombam Bupenda Meitei.

Mr. Meitei was a part of a four-member delegation from the Congress’s authorized division that submitted the memorandum on the Raj Bhavan in Imphal. The different members included Wahidur Rahman, S. Shyamacharan, and L. Brojen Singh.

The delegation famous that the Assembly was not in suspension on the time of the Chief Minister’s resignation, and thus Article 174(1) — which mandates that not more than six months ought to elapse between two sittings of a Legislative Assembly — remained relevant.

The Congress mentioned the Governor’s February 9 order successfully “circumvented the rigours of Article 174(1)” and additional delayed the Assembly’s sitting past the constitutionally permitted timeframe.

The social gathering requested the Governor to make clear whether or not the twelfth Legislative Assembly has remained “alive”, “lifeless”, or “dissolved” since February 12. It additionally sought to know whether or not the Governor would now be “constitutionally barred from summoning the sitting for the following session” of the present Assembly’s remaining time period.

The memorandum added that any gubernatorial motion or order requiring a brand new Chief Minister to bear a flooring take a look at “would tantamount to the violation of Article 174(1)”.