In a significant development, the Supreme Court Friday directed the government to respond to a petition challenging the dissolution of the Bihar assembly.

A vacation bench of judges P.V. Reddy and Arijit Pasayat granted the government two weeks time to file its response and one week thereafter for the petitioners to file their rejoinder.

The order came on a petition filed by four legislators who had been elected in the February polls that returned a fractured verdict. The house was kept in suspended animation and the newly elected legislators could not take oath. It was dissolved May 23 after efforts at government formation failed.

The petitioners contended that the dissolution was a mala fide exercise of power by the Bihar governor.

Appearing for the government, counsel Gopal Subramaniam maintained that the petitioners had not furnished any material for the court to entertain the petition.  He said the splinter group of the Lok Janshakti Party had not passed any resolution of its intention to merge with any other political group as claimed in the petition. 

In the absence of any material before the governor that there was a possibility of a government formation, he was justified in recommending dissolution of the house, Subramaniam argued.

Counsel Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for the petitioners, said the governor's report reflected his mala fide intention.  Going by the media reports, the governor was aware that the group headed by Nitish Kumar was to stake a claim to form the government. To prevent this, the Bihar governor hurriedly sent a report to the centre. 

The cabinet met at midnight and recommended dissolution and this was accepted by the President A.P.J. Abdul Kalam, who signed the order in Moscow, Rohatgi pointed out.

"What was the tearing hurry for the governor to send a report without exploring the possibility of a government formation through realignment of political parties?" counsel asked.