Legal experts say that Articles 188 and 193 of the Constitution give maximum authority to the Governor in this regard.
Article 188, which refers to the “oath or affirmation of the members of the Assembly or the Legislative Council”, clearly states: “Every member of the Legislative Assembly or the Legislative Council of a state shall, before taking his seat, formulate and sign before the Governor, or any person designated on his behalf, an oath or affirmation in accordance with the form established for this purpose in the Third Annex.”
On the other hand, Article 193, which refers to the “Penalty for sitting and voting before taking oath or affirmation under Article 188 or when unqualified or when disqualified” clearly states, “if a person sits or votes as a member of the Legislative Assembly or the Legislative Council of a state before he has complied with the requirements of article 188, or when he knows that he is not qualified or disqualified to be a member of them, or that the provisions prohibit him from doing so. of any law made by the Parliament or the Legislature of the state, he shall be liable, in respect of each day on which he meets or votes, for a fine of five hundred rupees which shall be recovered as a debt due to the state.”
Explaining the legal complexities of the matter, Calcutta High Court senior advocate Kaushik Gupta told IANS on Friday that “these two articles give the Governor the final say on the oath-taking of MLAs, be it in terms of the place (Raj Bhavan or State Assembly) or who will administer the oath (the Governor himself or any person nominated by him).”
“So there's not much to do in this case, unless the Governor softens his stance. Of course, there is a provision for the two MLAs to approach the courts in the matter. But in that case their participation in the Assembly proceedings as elected members will be delayed until the verdict on this charge comes,” Gupta explained.
Probably, keeping in mind the legal complications, there is an attempt by the Assembly authorities to appease the Governor.
West Bengal Assembly Speaker Biman Bandopadhyay on Thursday wrote to Speaker Droupadi Murmu asking him to intervene to resolve the deadlock over the issue.
He also wrote to the Governor asking him to come to the Assembly, take oath and end the confusion over the matter.
On the other hand, the Trinamool Congress is giving the issue a political dimension as the two newly elected MLAs, Sayantika Banerjee and Reyat Sarkar, plan to continue their dharna in the Assembly on Friday as well.
They insist that the Governor come to the Assembly and take the oath there.
Legal experts point out that there was also a procedural error on the part of the state government.
The initial communication made to the Governorate at the swearing-in ceremony came from the Assembly, while protocol and tradition says that the initial communication should have come from the state Department of Parliamentary Affairs.
Article 188, which refers to the “oath or affirmation of the members of the Assembly or the Legislative Council”, clearly states: “Every member of the Legislative Assembly or the Legislative Council of a state shall, before taking his seat, formulate and sign before the Governor, or any person designated on his behalf, an oath or affirmation in accordance with the form established for this purpose in the Third Annex.”
On the other hand, Article 193, which refers to the “Penalty for sitting and voting before taking oath or affirmation under Article 188 or when unqualified or when disqualified” clearly states, “if a person sits or votes as a member of the Legislative Assembly or the Legislative Council of a state before he has complied with the requirements of article 188, or when he knows that he is not qualified or disqualified to be a member of them, or that the provisions prohibit him from doing so. of any law made by the Parliament or the Legislature of the state, he shall be liable, in respect of each day on which he meets or votes, for a fine of five hundred rupees which shall be recovered as a debt due to the state.”
Explaining the legal complexities of the matter, Calcutta High Court senior advocate Kaushik Gupta told IANS on Friday that “these two articles give the Governor the final say on the oath-taking of MLAs, be it in terms of the place (Raj Bhavan or State Assembly) or who will administer the oath (the Governor himself or any person nominated by him).”
“So there's not much to do in this case, unless the Governor softens his stance. Of course, there is a provision for the two MLAs to approach the courts in the matter. But in that case their participation in the Assembly proceedings as elected members will be delayed until the verdict on this charge comes,” Gupta explained.
Probably, keeping in mind the legal complications, there is an attempt by the Assembly authorities to appease the Governor.
West Bengal Assembly Speaker Biman Bandopadhyay on Thursday wrote to Speaker Droupadi Murmu asking him to intervene to resolve the deadlock over the issue.
He also wrote to the Governor asking him to come to the Assembly, take oath and end the confusion over the matter.
On the other hand, the Trinamool Congress is giving the issue a political dimension as the two newly elected MLAs, Sayantika Banerjee and Reyat Sarkar, plan to continue their dharna in the Assembly on Friday as well.
They insist that the Governor come to the Assembly and take the oath there.
Legal experts point out that there was also a procedural error on the part of the state government.
The initial communication made to the Governorate at the swearing-in ceremony came from the Assembly, while protocol and tradition says that the initial communication should have come from the state Department of Parliamentary Affairs.