High court defers hearing on plea against Patil

New Delhi, July 9 (IANS) The Delhi High Court Monday deferred till Sep 24 the hearing of a petition asking the Election Commission to cancel the nomination papers of United Progressive Alliance's (UPA) presidential nominee Pratibha Patil.

Justice B.D. Ahmed said the matter would be heard after the presidential election was over as the process had already started.

The PIL was filed by the NGO Indraprastha People, which alleged that Patil, as managing trustee of the Mumbai-based Shram Sadhana Bombay Trust that is controlled by the Maharashtra government, was holding an office of profit. This made her ineligible to contest as president.

The trust runs several schools and colleges and Patil was receiving profits from the organisation, the NGO contended.

- IANS

Supreme Court dismisses plea against Patil's candidature

New Delhi, July 3 (IANS) The Supreme Court Tuesday dismissed a petition seeking directions to the Election Commission to cancel the nomination papers of United Progressive Alliance's (UPA) presidential candidate Pratibha Patil on the ground that she was in debt to the public exchequer.

A vacation bench of Justices Tarun Chatterjee and P.K. Balasubramanyan dismissed the petition saying there was no ground for moving the court under Article 32 of the constitution, which empowers a citizen to move the court for violation of fundamental rights.

The bench, however, gave the petitioner, advocate Manohar Lal Sharma, freedom to approach other appropriate authorities, including the Election Commission, for redressal of his grievances.

"This petition is filed under Article 32 of the constitution. We find no ground to interfere and exercise our jurisdiction. However, this will not prevent the petitioner from approaching appropriate authorities for redressal of his grievances," the bench said.

The court also scoffed at the petitioner for not having any documentary evidence to substantiate his allegation that the UPA government's presidential nominee was an "undischarged insolvent", indebted to public exchequer.

The bench asked Sharma if there was any court ruling declaring Patil - UPA's presidential nominee supported by the Left and Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) - an undischarged insolvent but the lawyer could not satisfy the court.

According to Sharma, Patil owed Rs.177 million to the public exchequer as founder president and chairperson of the Sant Muktai Cooperative Sugar Factory of Jalgaon in Maharashtra, set up in 1973.

The factory, which essentially happens to be Patil's family business entity, was granted the loan by the Mumbai District Co-Operative Bank under her guarantee as the company's president. It is still run by her brother, said Sharma.

He stated in his petition that a person is not qualified to be elected as president unless he or she is qualified to be elected as a member of parliament according to constitutional provisions. And any person indebted to the public exchequer is not qualified to be elected as a parliamentarian, he added.

Legal hurdle crops up to Pratibha Patil election as President

New Delhi, July 2 (IANS) The Supreme Court Monday decided to hear Tuesday a petition seeking cancellation of the United Progressive Alliance government's presidential candidate Pratibha Patil's nomination paper for the election on grounds of her allegedly being in debt to the public exchequer.

The major legal hurdle against Patil's near-sure election as president of the country cropped up after advocate Manohar Lal Sharma Monday mentioned before a vacation bench of Justice Tarun Chatterjee and Justice P.K. Balasubramanyan that he has filed in the court's registry a petition seeking cancellation of Patil's nomination paper.

Sharma told the bench that his petition raised the significant legal and constitutional question whether a person is eligible to be elected as president of the country despite being an "undischarged insolvent", having not been able to clear his debt to the public exchequer and others.

After hearing Sharma's preliminary contentions, the bench decided to take up the petition for elaborate hearing Tuesday.

Sharma in his petition alleged that the UPA government presidential nominee, who also enjoys the support of the Left parties and Bahujan Samaj Party, was an "undischarged insolvent" and owed a debt to the tune of Rs 177 million to the public exchequer.

Raising the crucial legal issue in his petition, Sharma said that as per the constitutional provisions, a person is not qualified to be elected as country's president unless he or she is qualified to be elected as a member of Parliament.

And as per another constitutional provision, an undischarged insolvent, owing debt to public exchequer is not qualified to be elected as a parliamentarian, Sharma added in his petition.

The petition said that Patil owed the astronomical debt of Rs 177 million to the exchequer as the founder president and chairperson of the Sant Muktai Co-operative Sugar Factory of Jalgaon in Maharashtra, set up in 1973.

The factory, which essentially happens to be Patil's family business entity, was granted the loan by Mumbai District Co-Operative Bank under Patil's guarantee as the company's president. The factory is still run by her brother, said Sharma.

Two years before she quit the chairpersonship of the factory in 1996, it owed a debt of Rs 177 million and the Mumbai District Co-operative bank had issued it notices in 1994 for recovery of the loan. The loan has not been paid till date.

Sharma said that a month back, the bank declared Patil's sugar factory as defaulter and ordered it to be sealed as repeated notices by the bank to her, issued on her address as the Rajasthan governor till recently, did not get any response.

The petitioner pointed out to the court that the UPA government's presidential nominee did not disclose all these crucial details in her nomination paper to the election commission.

He sought the court's direction to the poll panel to cancel her nomination papers for not disclosing all these details.

A president should be someone with a vision for India

(COMMENTARY)
By Shekhar Tiwari

India is in the thick of electing a new president and the time could not be more opportune to reflect on the qualities we must look for in the new leader even though the office is more symbolic than executive. It is disheartening to notice that the entire debate on the presidential election ends up focusing on the superfluous, the partisan and the non-essential.

For instance, one frequently hears that certain sections of India's political establishment have been insisting that the new president ought to have political grounding. Then there are those who would naturally look for a leader who is more amenable to their ideological biases and predispositions. Yet another section would probably look for someone who fits their caste or class preferences. It is striking that hardly does one hear any politician of consequence speaking out in favour of a visionary figure who is above political, caste and other narrow equations.

Instead of looking for someone whose vision is more attuned to an India of the next 50 years, a lot of people in India are looking for someone who is a political conformist with no new ideas and someone who is not guided by the past but beckoned by the future.

It should be said to the credit of President A.P.J. Abdul Kalam that he has been successful in breathing in a new life and a new vision into an office that is largely ceremonial. One does not recall an instance in recent times when ordinary people have actually gone out of their way to campaign for continuing the incumbent in Rashtrapati Bhavan. It is a tribute to Kalam's unusual style of functioning where he saw his role as the chief motivator in a country where more than 50 percent of its population is 25 years of age or less.

Kalam brought the right mix of modernity, scientific temper and idealism free from any political prejudices. That is the reason why he has become so popular. Now that the office of the president has been elevated to a different level, it is important that India looks for someone who not only maintains those standards but even goes beyond them.

The first and foremost attribute that we need to look for in a new president is unimpeachable personal integrity and the passion to do what is right constitutionally without any fear or favor. After all, contrary to popular notions the president is not a partisan figure installed to further the interests of a single party or ideology but the entire country.

Another important attribute that we must look for is that the person should have a compelling vision of India that is in line with the 21st century and devoid of archaic or outdated ideas. The way I see it the job of the president is to inspire the rest of the country to aspire to higher values and greater excellence in all our national endeavors. We need a president who inspires the people of India, particularly its young, to go beyond the call of their duty and job to help the country achieve its promise of greatness.

We also need in our new president a sense of conviction that India's role in world affairs has changed decisively in the last decade or so. From being a marginal voice on the international stage, it is now the world's most cherished growing democracy. That puts on the office of the president that much more weight to carry. In the president's role as the ambassador of everything that is great about India, the incumbent ought to represent a combination of the country's glorious past but, more important, its great future.

Although constitutionally the president is supposed to articulate the policies and philosophies of the prime minister and his cabinet, there is enough flexibility in that role to leave a mark of independence. We need a president who would not fight shy of asserting independence without in any way challenging the supremacy of the constitution.

We also need a president who does not merely get lost in the ceremonies of the office but uses the powerful platform to introduce generational change in our mindsets about the way we do many things in India. The office has some inherent strengths, both constitutional and symbolic, to enable its occupant to subtly guide India on a course that the politically hamstrung executive branch sometimes may hesitate to.

It is very important that we do not reduce the office of the president to an ugly battleground of partisan politics as it frequently becomes. All political parties must realize that the office is greater than the sum of their political ambitions. The office has certain gravitas that must rise above all politics and all machinations.

(Shekhar Tiwari is an Indian American community leader who lives in Washington, DC. He can be contacted at sstiwari@yahoo.com)