B.M. Lal, J. - (1.) By this public/political interest litigation, petitioners, 1-Sri A.P.N. Giri, Advocate, High Court, Allahabad, 2-Smt. Saroj Giri and 3 - Sri Gyanendra Mrityunjaya, Advocate, High Court Allahabad, pray for a writ in the nature of quo-warranto commanding the Union of India respondent No.2 to show the authority (Quo-Jure) that under which provision of law the Prime Minister and his council of Ministers are entitled to vote under Article 100 of the Constitution of India, and commanding respondent No. 1 & 3 i. e. Union of India through Speaker of Parliament and Union of India through Attorney General of India, to show the authority (Quo-Jure) that under which provision of law they permit the respondent No. 2 the Prime Minister and his council of Ministers, to vote under Article 100 of the Constitution of India.
(2.) The petitioners have further prayed to issue a writ of prohibition restraining the Prime Minister and his counsel of Ministers from voting on any bill in either house of the Parliament or in any joint sitting of the Houses under Article 100 of the Constitution of India, and commanding the respondent No. 1 & 3-Union of India through the Speaker and Union of India through Attorney General of India, to restrain respondent No. 2-Union of India through the Prime Minister and his council of Ministers, from voting on any bill under Article 100 of the Constitution of India.
(3.) Petitioner No. 1 Sri A.P.N. Giri appeared in person and in support of his relief clause he submitted that in a democracy such as ours, the Executive, the Legislature and the Judiciary constitute the three pillars of the State, what is intended to be conveyed is that the three essential functions of the State are entrusted to the three organs of the State and each one of them in turn represents the authority of the State. Those who exercise the State power are the Ministers, the Legislatures and the Judges.;