- (1.) THIS writ petition has been filed by Sri Surat Singh Yadava. Opposite Party No. 1 in this writ petition is Sri Sudama Prasad Goswami. Sri Sudama Prasad Goawami was elected a member of the Vidhan Sabha, Uttar Pradesh, on the Congress ticket in the last general elections held in the year 1962 from 311, Moth Assembly Constituency, District Jhansi. The case of the petitioner in the writ petition is that Shri Sudama Prasad Goswami has resigned his seat in the U.P. Vidhan Sabha. The cause of the resignation of his seat by Opposite Party No. 1 in the Vidhan Sabha, as stated in the writ petition, was the arrest in connection with a dacoity case of one Sri Raghunath Singh who belonged to the Jan Sangh party. The allegation of the petitioner is that the police who had arrested him did not disclose information regarding the circumstances leading to the arrest of the said Raghunath Singh. This was resented by Sri Sudama Prasad Goswami Opposite Party No. 1 who resorted to a fast as a measure of protest against the high-handed action of the Police. The arrest of Sri Raghunath Singh was made on the 6th of October, 1963. at about 7 p.m. Sri Sudama Prasad Goswami started his fast on the morning of the 7th of October, 1963 On the same day a public meeting was held in which, according to the petitioner, Opposite Party No. 1 made an announcement that he had resigned his seat in the Vidhan Sabha, U.P., and sent his letter of resignation to the Speaker, Vidhan Sabha, Uttar Pradesh. The Speaker Vidhan Sabha, Uttar Pradesh, is impleaded as opposite party No. 2 in this writ petition. The version of opposite party No. 1 Sri Sudama Prasad Goswami, however, is that in his speech in the meeting he had not stated that the letter of resignation had been sent by him to the Speaker, Vidhan Sabha, U.P. His announcement in the meeting was that he had sent his letter of resignation to the All India Congress Committee. New Delhi, to be forwarded thereafter to the Proper authority empowered to deal with it in case of their approval. According to Sri Sudama Prasad Goswami, being a member of the Congress party, he felt that he was bound by the rules of discipline to refer the matter to the High Command for approval and the letter was to be sent by the President. All India Congress Committee to the Speaker only it he gave his consent to his proposed resignation.
(2.) IT appears that the news of the fast undertaken by Sri Sudama Prasad Goswami reached Lucknow and Sri Newal Kishore, M.L.A. former Deputy Home Minister, Uttar Pradesh Government, reached Lalitpur on the 8th of October, 1963 He held out an assurance to Sri Sudama Prasad Goswami that an inquiry would be held into the matter leading to the arrest of Sri Raghunath Singh. Opposite party No. 1 was thus persuaded to end his fast in the evening of the 8th of October, 1963, after lapse of about thirty-six hours. The case of the petitioner further is that after ending his fast opposite party No. 1 addressed a Press Conference at Jhansi on the 9th of October, 1963, in which also he stated that he had sent his letter of resignation from the membership of the Vidhan Sabha, U.P. to the opposite party No. 2 He further stated that he felt distressed at the action of the Police and had resorted to fasting for his self-purification. The petitioner has filed copies of a daily newspaper "Jagran" of Jhansi, dated the 10th of October, 1963 (Annexure-2), of Weekly "Vir Arjun", New Delhi, dated the 13th of October, 1963 (Annexure-3), of "Tarun Bharat" dated the 13th of October, 1963 (Annexure-4), and the Sunday Standard", New Delhi, dated the 13th October 1963 (Annexure-5) to support of his version. On the other hand, the version of opposite party No. 1 is that in the Press Conference the statement made by him was that he in ended to resign his membership of the U.P. Vidhan Sabha and had forwarded his resignation to the President of the All India Congress Committee, New Delhi. After he had made the above state rent Sri Bhagirath put a question to the deponent as to why he had not sent his resignation to the Speaker of the Vidhan Sahha, U.P. and in reply he had stated that he was elected a member of the Vidhau Sabha on the Congress ticket and was bound by the discipline of the Congress Party and consequently he had forwarded his resignation to the President of the All India Congress Committee, New Delhi, who could take such action on the resignation as he thought fit. He made a similar statement in a Press conference at Lucknow. In support of this version opposite party No. 1 has filed copies of "Dainik Bhaskar", a daily issued from Jhansi, dated the 10th of October, 1963 (Annexure-2), of the "Aaj" of Varanasi dated the 15th of October, 1963 (Annexure-A3) and of the Swatantra Bharat of Lucknow dated the 14th October, 1963 (Annexure-A4).
(3.) THE petition then goes on to state that a meeting of the Assembly was held on the 17th of October, 1963, when opposite party No. 1 was seen, sitting in the Vidhan Sabha and treating himself as a member of that House. At that time another member of the Vidhan Sabha, Sri Brahma Dutta Mayar, an M.L.A. from Saharanpur, inquired from Sri Madan Mohan Verma, Speaker of the Vidhan Sabha U.P. who was occupying the chair at that time whether the resignation letter of opposite party No. 1 had been received by him or not. Sri Madan Mohan Verma thereupon replied that he had not received any letter of resignation from Sri Sudama Prasad Goswami. The latter kept quiet and did not contradict the statement of Sri Brahma Dutta and later on left the House. Opposite party No. 1 in his counter-affidavit admitted the allegation that he had attended the session of the House on the 17th of October, 1963, and further admitted that the said question was raised in the Assembly at the instance of Sri Brahma Dutta Mayar, M.L.A. According to him, however, there was no necessity on his part to contradict the statement of Sri Mayar as the Speaker had already replied that he had not received any letter of resignation from him. Further, according to opposite party No. 1 he continued sitting in the House upto 1 p.m. when the House had broken up for the lunch recess. Thereafter he reattended the afternoon session of the House. Opposite party No. 1 further stated in his counter affidavit that on the 17th of October, 1963, he had written a letter to the Speaker Vidhan Sabha, explaining the circumstances and nature of his alleged letter of resignation. In this letter he had stated that as a disciplined member of the Congress Party he had sent his letter of resignation to the President of the All India Congress Committee, and sent a copy of the same to the President of the U.P. Congress Committee as well as to the President of the District Congress Committee. He had not sent any letter of resignation to the Speaker. The letter of resignation sent by him to the President of the All India Congress Committee contained a request that the said resignation might be forwarded to the proper authorities. As he had received no permission to submit his resignation from the membership of the Legislative Assembly, he had not sent any letter of resignation to the Speaker. A copy of this letter is filed as Annexure A-5 by the opposite party No. 1.;