The Nainital High Court's Division Bench comprising Chief Justice K M Joseph and Justice V K Bisht, on Thursday, said they will have to give an interim order on the case challenging President's Rule in the State.
On Thursday, the hearing in the case continued from Wednesday where senior lawyer and Congress leader Abhishek Manu Singhvi, who was representing Harish Rawat in the High Court, argued that invoking Article 356 to impose President's Rule in the State was "baseless and wrong" and that passing, or not passing, of the Appropriation Bill could not be made the basis of imposing President's Rule in Uttarakhand.
On Thursday, Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi along with Additional Solicitors General Tushar Mehta and Maninder Singh argued the case on President's Rule in the State on behalf of the Centre.
>Understanding the Uttarakhand crisis
Mr. Rohatgi pleaded for adjournment of the hearing to file the centre's reply on a rejoinder filed by Harish Rawat on Tuesday where he mentioned that the case was not based solely on proceedings of the State Assembly on March 18 and that Uttarakhand Assembly's proceedings on March 17 must also be considered since budgetary allocations were made for different parts of the Appropriation Bill on March 17 too.
Mr. Rohatgi argued in the court: "Either they [Harish Rawat's lawyers] remove their rejoinder, or I should get 3-4 days to file a surrejoinder."
The Bench gave the Centre time until April 12 to file its rejoinders in cases around President's Rule in the High Court by April 12.
Chief Justice Joseph said that no hearing could be held in the case before April 18. "However, we will have to pass an interim Order in the case until the next hearing," he said.
