Nationwide Implications of the Himachal High Court Verdict Nullifying Chief Parliamentary Secretaries’ Appointments
IN A REPRIEVE for the Sukhu government, the Supreme Court has granted a stay on the further proceedings of disqualification against six MLAs appointed as Chief Parliamentary Secretaries (CPS) in 2023.
A bench comprising Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar halted the Himachal Pradesh High Court’s ruling, which had removed the CPS from their posts and cleared the way for disqualification proceedings over holding an office of profit. While the Supreme Court’s stay means the six MLAs will no longer serve as CPS, they will retain their positions as MLAs.
The Supreme Court also directed the state government to refrain from making further CPS or PS appointments, stating that such actions would be contrary to the law. It sought responses from BJP leader Kalpana Devi and others who had challenged these appointments in the High Court. The matter will come up for hearing again after a month in the SC, which will settle the issue once and for all.
In a related development, a landmark and historical verdict was recently delivered by the Himachal Pradesh High Court bench, comprising Justice Vivek Singh Thakur and Justice Bipin Chander Negi, annulling the appointments of six Chief Parliamentary Secretaries (CPS). This ignited vigorous debate within political and administrative circles.
This significant ruling highlights the judiciary’s pivotal role in protecting constitutional integrity, with far-reaching implications for governance, fiscal prudence, and the boundaries of executive power. By confronting political expediency, the verdict establishes a precedent that could transform governance practices nationwide.
The Road Ahead: Legislative Reform or Status Quo?
The Himachal High Court’s ruling could trigger nationwide legislative scrutiny to ensure that roles similar to CPS align with constitutional boundaries. In this complex scenario, embedded in the constitution’s mandatory provisions, legal experts suggest that over-ambitious states should refrain from such appointments, thereby respecting judicial authority over political expedience. This could pave the way for a more transparent and accountable system of governance, free from the ambiguities of quasi-ministerial roles.
The Himachal Pradesh High Court’s verdict, alongside similar judgments, including those by the Supreme Court, marks a watershed moment in the balance between the executive and the judiciary. By curbing unconstitutional practices, the courts have not only reinforced constitutional principles but also provided a model for more fiscally and administratively responsible governance.
Public Perception and Political Fallout
Experts suggest that public opinion has largely welcomed the verdict as a corrective measure against political overreach. By emphasizing constitutional propriety and fiscal prudence, the court has sent a clear message that governance must prioritize public welfare over political expediency. The main opposition in Himachal, the BJP, may capitalize on this situation, framing the invalidated appointments as a failure of the ruling government to adhere to constitutional norms.
Political Implications: Curtailing Executive Overreach
The verdict delivers a significant blow to the state’s executive authority, serving as a judicial check against the misuse of CPS appointments to consolidate power. The current Sukhu-led Congress government is not the first to make such appointments. Previous state governments, including the BJP’s Dhumal administration in 2013 and the Congress’ Virbhadra Singh-led government, similarly used CPS roles to reward loyalists. However, the previous Jai Ram Thakur government refrained from such appointments.
By invalidating these positions, the court has disrupted an informal practice of extending ministerial influence, setting a precedent for other states. This decision could prompt states to reconsider similar strategies, particularly where CPS appointments serve to manage internal party conflicts. In Himachal, the ruling deprives the government of a tool used to appease factions and reward loyalists, potentially intensifying intra-party challenges.
Fiscal Ramifications: A Boon for the State Exchequer
CPS appointments, while politically expedient, impose a financial burden on the state through salaries, allowances, and operational expenses. Nullifying these roles presents an opportunity for fiscal consolidation in a state grappling with a severe financial crisis.
Himachal Pradesh, already struggling under mounting debt and limited central assistance, can redirect these funds to critical sectors like health, education, and infrastructure, instead of incurring wasteful expenditures on CPS roles with minimal contributions to governance. This aspect of the verdict resonates with economic conservatives and taxpayers, providing a blueprint for states facing similar fiscal constraints.
Judicial Context and Legal Precedents
The High Court’s decision aligns with prior rulings from the Supreme Court and various High Courts, including those in Punjab and Haryana (2009), Rajasthan (2018), and Guwahati (2017), which struck down similar CPS appointments. These judgments collectively emphasize the constitutional limitations on such positions, underscoring the judiciary’s commitment to uphold the 91st Amendment, which caps the size of the council of ministers at 15% of a state’s legislative assembly.
Himachal government’s Advocate General, Anup Kumar Rattan, has defended the state’s stance, arguing that CPS appointees would not lose their Vidhan Sabha membership and revealing that a Special Leave Petition (SLP) has been filed in the Supreme Court, which is scheduled for a hearing today. He cited a precedent where CPS appointments in Assam were quashed without disqualifying MLAs.
However, the BJP has countered this by filing a caveat in the Supreme Court, demanding the disqualification of the ousted CPS. This raises critical constitutional questions about whether the High Court’s ruling will apply retrospectively, potentially costing the CPS their legislative seats. The Supreme Court will settle the crucial issue stemming from the High Court’s ruling, which states: “Natural consequences and legal implications thereof shall follow forthwith in accordance with the law.”
Administrative Impact: Streamlining Governance
The removal of CPS positions simplifies administrative structures by eliminating an unnecessary layer of power. With fewer actors involved in governance, the focus now shifts entirely to ministers and bureaucrats, potentially enhancing efficiency and accountability. By reinforcing the separation between legislative and executive roles, the decision strengthens constitutional principles and promotes a clearer governance framework.
Legal Implications: Broader Judicial Oversight
The Himachal High Court’s decision underscores the judiciary’s role in preserving constitutional integrity. By nullifying CPS appointments, it reaffirms the importance of the 91st Amendment and sets a legal precedent that discourages future governments from bypassing constitutional limitations. The ruling may inspire similar legal challenges in other states, further curbing political excesses and abuses.
This judgment also bolsters public confidence in the judiciary as a guardian of constitutional principles, ensuring that political convenience does not override legal and fiscal accountability. The public has broadly welcomed the court’s decision, particularly given the strain that such appointments place on the state’s exchequer, especially when Himachal struggles to pay salaries to employees and pensions to retirees.
Historical and Constitutional Context
The concept of Chief Parliamentary Secretaries has long been contentious. While intended to provide administrative support, these appointments often blur the separation of powers between the executive and the legislature. The 91st Amendment sought to address such overlaps by limiting the size of ministerial councils, a provision frequently sidestepped by state governments.
In Himachal Pradesh, the High Court’s verdict sends a clear legal signal that such appointments undermine constitutional safeguards. While the rulings pose immediate challenges for state governments, they also offer a long-term opportunity to redefine governance in alignment with constitutional values. As other states watch closely, these judgments stand as a testament to the judiciary’s role in safeguarding India’s democratic framework. 
Also Read: What Drives Indian Voters?
K. S. Tomar
The writer, a senior political analyst, is a former Editor of the Hindustan Times' Rajasthan edition and has spent nearly four decades in journalism, including a six year stint in Nepal where he covered Sino-India-Nepal complex relationship and had a ringside seat to the Himalayan Kingdom's transition into democracy.
Disclaimer : PunjabTodayNews.com and other platforms of the Punjab Today group strive to include views and opinions from across the entire spectrum, but by no means do we agree with everything we publish. Our efforts and editorial choices consistently underscore our authors’ right to the freedom of speech. However, it should be clear to all readers that individual authors are responsible for the information, ideas or opinions in their articles, and very often, these do not reflect the views of PunjabTodayNews.com or other platforms of the group. Punjab Today does not assume any responsibility or liability for the views of authors whose work appears here.
Punjab Today believes in serious, engaging, narrative journalism at a time when mainstream media houses seem to have given up on long-form writing and news television has blurred or altogether erased the lines between news and slapstick entertainment. We at Punjab Today believe that readers such as yourself appreciate cerebral journalism, and would like you to hold us against the best international industry standards. Brickbats are welcome even more than bouquets, though an occasional pat on the back is always encouraging. Good journalism can be a lifeline in these uncertain times worldwide. You can support us in myriad ways. To begin with, by spreading word about us and forwarding this reportage. Stay engaged.
— Team PT