Wednesday, 15, Apr, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Krishna Kumar Singh Alias Satish ... vs The Speaker U.P.Legislative ...
2011 Latest Caselaw 4814 ALL

Citation : 2011 Latest Caselaw 4814 ALL
Judgement Date : 23 September, 2011

Allahabad High Court
Krishna Kumar Singh Alias Satish ... vs The Speaker U.P.Legislative ... on 23 September, 2011
Bench: Uma Nath Singh, Anil Kumar



HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 2
 

 
Case :- MISC. BENCH No. - 9466 of 2011
 

 
Petitioner :- Krishna Kumar Singh Alias Satish Verma
 
Respondent :- The Speaker U.P.Legislative Assembly U.P.Lko.And Another
 
Petitioner Counsel :- P.K.Sinha
 

 
Hon'ble Uma Nath Singh,J.

Hon'ble Anil Kumar,J.

Heard Shri P.K.Sinha, learned counsel for petitioner and Shri P. N. Gupta, learned counsel for opposite parties.

According to learned counsel for opposite party no.2, Shri P.N.Gupta, there is no dispute about the settled proposition of law that if a thing has to be done in a particular manner, then it should be done in that manner or not at all, which has also been reiterated in the judgment reported in (1996) 9 SCC 495 (J.N. Ganatra vs. Morvi Municipality, Morvi). Para 4 of the judgment being relevant  on re-production reads as under:-

"...... It is settled proposition of law that a power under a statute has to be exercised in accordance with the provisions of the statute and in no other manner...."

Moreover in the concluding paragraph of  a recent judgment passed in Writ Petition No.8863 (MB) of 2011, we have observed as under:-

" On a careful consideration of the aforesaid submissions, we find that it would be open for the speaker to decide the issues of resignation and disqualification together or individually, for, in the given facts and circumstances of the case, these two issues appear to be inextricably interwoven, and now since the matter is pending before the Speaker, he would be the best judge to decide as to how the matter is to be decided in keeping with the best tradition of his office namely the absolute and unvarying impartiality as observed in the Constitution Bench judgment of Hon'ble the Apex Court reported in 1992 Supp. (2) SCC 651 - Kihoto Hollohan v. Zachillhu. However, it need not be clarified that he can even ask the parties to adduce evidence to reach the right conclusion."

Thus, without issuing notice to the speaker, we hope and trust that he would follow the procedure established by law and decide the matter, while keeping in view of the best tradition of his office, after affording proper opportunity to parties.

Writ petition is, thus, dismissed.

Order Date :- 23.9.2011

Mahesh

 

 

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IDRC

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter