Former AAP MLA Sandeep Kumar has approached the Delhi High Court seeking the removal of arrested party leader Arvind Kejriwal from the post of chief minister of the national capital.
The petition is listed for hearing before Justice Subramonium Prasad on Monday.
In his petition, Kumar has said after his arrest by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) in connection with a money-laundering case linked to the now-scrapped excise policy for Delhi, Kejriwal has incurred an “incapacity” to carry out the chief minister’s functions under the Constitution.
The plea says the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader’s “unavailability” complicates the constitutional mechanism and he can never function as the chief minister from prison according to the mandate of the Constitution.
“Article 239AA(4) of the Constitution provides for the Council of Ministers with the chief minister at the head to aid and advise the lieutenant governor in the exercise of his functions in relation to matters with respect to which the legislative Assembly has power to make laws. The aid and advice to the lieutenant governor are practically not possible without the chief minister being a free person available to render his aid and advice under the Constitution,” the petition says.
“Issue a writ of quo warranto against Respondent No.1 i.e. Mr Arvind Kejriwal, the incumbent chief minister of Delhi, by calling upon him to show by what authority, qualification and title he holds the office of the chief minister of Delhi under Article 239AA of the Constitution and after an inquiry, dislodge him from the office of the chief minister of Delhi with or without the retrospective effect,” the petition prays.
Kejriwal, who was arrested by the ED on March 21, is currently lodged in Tihar Jail.
The high court had earlier rejected two public interest litigation pleas seeking Kejriwal’s removal from the chief minister’s post.
On April 4, a bench of Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Manmeet P S Arora refused to entertain a PIL on the issue, saying it was Kejriwal’s personal choice to continue as the chief minister.
Earlier, the bench had dismissed a similar PIL, observing that the petitioner had failed to show any legal bar that prohibited the arrested chief minister from holding office. It had observed that there was no scope for judicial interference in the matter and that it was for the other organs of the State to look into the issue.
