Sign up now
to enroll in courses, follow best educators, interact with the community and track your progress.
Part II - Analysis of Uttarakhand Crisis: Indian Constitution for UPSC CSE
3,239 plays

This lesson is in continuation of the previous lesson on Uttarakhand crisis. The lesson begins with an explanation of central government's move to SC over HC verdict and it​s consequences. Then on, the question of authority and question of procedure is explained. Finally, it focuses on the question of governer's conduct and the question raised over the center and concludes with how CM cleared the floor test.​

Bhavin Sangoi
BA Political Science and Psychology, Mumbai University. Teaching Polity, Economics and international relations for 7 years.

Unacademy user
Sir is dier alder synthesis there in jee mains syllabus????
Sachin Rana
2 years ago
Bhavin Sahab, you have said in the video that the one nominated member can not participate in the floor test. But in all other cases except in President's election they can vote. Including money bills and no-cnfidence motions in both LAs and LS. In UK's case as well the one nominated member RV Gardner participated in the floor test. I think you got confused by the 2005 SC order when in Jharkhand's fllor test "hurriedly nominated" anglo indian member was disallowed to vote. Please clarify if there are any other cases in your knowledge where the powe of nominated members is restricted as compared to elected MLAs/MPs Also, thanks for the dedicated efforts in making these lectures.
Bhavin sir, please throw some light on the rules for suspending an MLA (Maharashtra/AP)/MP(Bhagwant MAn). Are they completely determined by Rules and Procedures of the Houses and what are the limitations on the suspension orders (like max for one session or for any time frame as the majority decides)
Once the Speaker has disqualified members under Schedule Ten, do the disqualified members have the right to approach HC to seek relief? Isn't the Speaker's decision final in the House and above judicial review? Please do clear this doubt. Thanks!
Bhavin Sangoi
3 years ago
Although in Anti defection law it was mentioned that Speaker's decision shall befinal, but SC in zachillu v/s Kihoto Hollohan case declared this provision unconstitutional. I have explained it here. Watch it.
Rajat Ubhaykar
3 years ago
Thanks! Wonderful video!
Sir, Thanks for awesome lessons. I have few questions:- Q1: If Speaker allow the voting for the passage of Appropriation Bill and the 9 MLAs voted against it, does they be suspended under Schedule -10 ?? Q2: If SC rejects the disqualification of 9 dissidents congress MLAs and allowed them to vote prior to the House test then what would be the fate of BJP then ? i mean could they vote in favour BJP in the floor test ? Thanks Mukesh Sharma
Bhavin Sangoi
3 years ago
1)Yes, had they voted against their own party's Appropriation Bill, then they could have been legitimately disqualified under anti defection law. But Speaker couldn't have taken this chance because their disqualification doesn't invalidate their vote given in the Assembly,and hence the Bill would have been defeated because of their adverse vote. 2)Yes, they would have definitely voted in favor of BJP and that would have helped BJP in forming the government. I am saying this because later on these MLAs officially joined BJP. BJP and Congress both had same number of seats after disqualification of 9 MLAs, it is only because of Mayawati's support PDF voted in favor of Congress.
Mukesh Sharma
3 years ago
Thanks for your prompt response Sir. one more question pertaining to point no.2 --- if these 9 MLAs voted in favour of BJP in the floor test, then BJP would have form the Government but these 9MLAs could have been disqualified by the Speaker under Schd-10 because at least 2/3rd members are required to join other party or form new party. now the question is whether the BJP remains in power after their suspension and if yes how could BJP prove its majority without these 9 MLAs.
Bhavin Sangoi
3 years ago
Actually had BJP succeeded in forming the government with the support of these 9 dissidents, then even after their disqualification BJP had 1 MLA more than Congress. So the whole game depended on PDF whose reigns were in the hands of Mayawati. BJP was confident that once it forms the government it will succeed in persuading BSP by offering benefits. Secondly even if BJP had lost the majority after forming the government, it would have recommended dissolution of Assembly. But till then it would have got Upper hand in Rajya sabha elections that were due in few days. Each seat in Rajya sabha mattered to BJP, because most of the Bills are struck in Rajya sabha. Now BJP will anyway get the GST Bill passed due to support of other parties.
Sir I have one question. If the ruling party is attempting to pass a law that driven by a profit motive and does not benefit the majority population, do all the MLAs necessarily have to vote in favour? If they don't they can be disqualified ?
Divya Jain
3 years ago
MLAs of that party*
Bhavin Sangoi
3 years ago
Yes, as long as they remain in the party, they must vote according to the party whip, but if they are so fed up with the party or if they think that party isn't working for people anymore, then at least 2/3rd of them or all can leave the party and join any other party or form their new party. For more details watch these two lectures.
  1. Course Name: In-depth study of Centre State Relations Lesson Name: Uttarakhand Crisis - I1 PRESENTED BY BHAVIN SANGO

  2. About me B.A in Political Science & Psychology Appeared in UPSC CSE Mains VTeaching Indian Polity, International Relations, economics &mental Ability since 5 years Experience of teaching for various competitive exams such as NTSE, CET & UPSC Course Fee: CONTRIBUTE Follow me on:

  3. Center moved SC Centre moved SC, which stayed HC orders asked certain tough questions to centre and fixed date for floor test on 10/05/16

  4. Question of authority Who is to decide whether the bill was passed or not? If the speaker claims the bill was passed, can governor reject that claim?

  5. Question of procedure Is it necessary to pass Appropriation Bill by division of votes when demand for grants were voted in such manner Not conducting division of votes was a procedural error, but can article 356 be invoked for such a minor error Not conducting division of votes was a proceduralerror, ut can article 356 be

  6. Question on Governor's conduct Does the governor have right to demand video and audio footage assembly session? Can question of majority and minority support be settled at Raj Bhawan?

  7. Questions raised over center Is corruption by CM enough reason to invoke Article 356? Is sting operation of CM legally tenable to prove him corrupt and impose Article 356?

  8. D - Day President rule was lifted for few hours, to conduct the test. Nine dissidents couldn't vote as their appeal against disqualification is still pending in HC The original size of 70 elected members in the assembly was reduced to 61 because of disqualification of 9 members

  9. Rawat passed the floor test CM won floor test as he had support of 33 MLAs which include - 26 Congress, 6 Progressive democratic front (PDF) and 1 BJP dissident. 1 Congress MLA voted for BJP ISSI