Hafiz Ahsaan Ahmad Khokhar, Advocate Supreme Court, has stated that in the present case the Governor of Punjab and the opposition members of Punjab Assembly simultaneously invoked Article 130(7) and 136 of the Constitution against the Chief Minister Punjab.
According to the Constitutional expert that as per Article 107 of the Constitution a Provincial Assembly shall, unless sooner dissolved, continue for a term of five years from the day of its first meeting and shall stand dissolved at the expiration of its term. According to Constitutional expert that under Article 112 (1) of the Constitution, the Governor of a Province is bound and has no legal choice except to dissolve the Provincial Assembly if so advised by the Chief Minister and the Provincial Assembly shall, unless sooner dissolved, stand dissolved at the expiration of forty-eight hours after the Chief Minister has so advised.
According to Hafiz Ahsaan Ahmad Khokhar, the Chief Minister shall hold office during the pleasure of the Governor under Article 130(7) of the Constitution but the Governor shall not exercise his powers under this clause unless he is satisfied that the Chief Minister does not command the confidence of the majority of the members of the Provincial Assembly, in which case he shall summon the Provincial Assembly and require the Chief Minister to obtain a vote of confidence from the Assembly.
According to the Constitutional expert though there is no time limit imposed under Article 130(7) of the Constitution upon Chief Minister to get the vote of Confidence as required above, but the Governor is competent and can fix a date of reasonable time, and on receipt of such directions, the Speaker of a Provincial Assembly cannot adjourn the matter to his own sweet will, and the refereed matter by Governor under Article 130(7) of the Constitution should be implemented within very reasonable time.
The Constitutional expert further stated that a resolution for a vote of no-confidence moved by not less than twenty per cent of the total membership of the Provincial Assembly could be passed under Article 136 (1) of the Constitution against the Chief Minister and the resolution referred to in clause (1) of Article 136 of the Constitution and shall not be voted upon before the expiration of three days, or later than seven days, from the day on which such resolution is moved in the Provincial Assembly, and If the resolution referred to in clause (l)of 136 of the Constitution is passed by a majority of the total membership of the Provincial Assembly, the Chief Minister shall cease to hold office. However, the Governor under Article 133 of the Constitution can ask the Chief Minister to continue to hold office until his successor enters upon the office of Chief Minister.
The legal expert further stated that the Governor can also dissolve the Provincial Assembly in his discretion, but subject to the previous approval of the President, where a vote of no-confidence having been passed against the Chief Minister, no other member of the Provincial Assembly commands the confidence of the majority of the members of the Provincial Assembly in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution, as ascertained in a session of the Provincial Assembly summoned for the purpose.
According to Constitutional expert that the present matter in view of the situation prevalent since April, and the ruling of Speaker on any point would ultimately go to the Superior Court both in term of the process of Vote of Confidence as required by Governor under Article 130(7) of the Constitution with respect to holding a session as fixed by him, and the point of process for Vote of no Confidence as submitted by opposition under Article 136 of the Constitution that which would take first along with Constitutional consequences.
.jpg)
.jpg)
