The Supreme Court on Wednesday stayed the Andhra Pradesh High Court order, questioning the wisdom of the state legislature, the government, the Chief Minister and advocates representing the state.
A bench, headed by Chief Justice S.A. Bobde and comprising Justices A.S. Bopanna and V. Ramasubramanian, after hearing submissions by senior advocate Sajan Poovayya, representing Andhra Pradesh, said: “Issue notice. In the meantime, there shall be stay of operation of the impugned order(s) of the High Court.”
On December 30 last year, the High Court had passed an order after the government filed an application seeking recusal of the judge stating he had prejudged the issue even without hearing the government.
“The court, instead of addressing the issue at hand, has chosen to travel completely beyond the scope and has proceeded to castigate the wisdom of the legislature, the government, the Chief Minister as well as the advocates representing the government,” said the state government in its plea through advocate Mahfooz Ahsan Nazki.
The state government argued that the observations made in the order are completely uncalled for and grossly misconceived and are therefore liable to be set aside forthwith.
The government’s plea said the bench presided by the same judge on October 1, last year, posed a question as to why the court should not declare that there is a constitutional break down of state machinery. However, the top court stayed this order on December 18 last year.
The state government cited the observations made by the judge during the hearing of the case, including: “How could the government auction the properties of the state, had government become bankrupt to auction government properties, we will declare there is breakdown of constitutional machinery in the state and hand over administration to the Central government.”
The state government said besides rejecting the application for recusal, the High Court judge proceeded to make various unconnected and uncalled for observations. “This state has been burdened with this unceremonious task only in view of the nature of the impugned order, which, it is most respectfully submitted, is completely unwarranted, unprecedented and therefore, completely unsustainable,” it said.