Jaya Bachchan addressing a rally in Bengal. (File picture)

New Delhi, May 8: A member of Parliament can be disqualified for holding an office of profit whether the person received any remuneration or not, if it is proved that the office in question itself was one of profit, the Supreme Court ruled today.

The order, issued while dismissing a petition of disqualified MP Jaya Bachchan, adds a sense of urgency to a bill proposed to bail out several members whose status is now under a cloud.

“The question whether the petitioner actually received any pecuniary gain or not is of no consequence,” the bench said, pointing out that the law on the point had already been settled by the apex court decades ago.

A bench headed by Chief Justice Y.K. Sabharwal noted that any government office “capable” of yielding pecuniary gain or material benefit would attract disqualification.

When senior counsel Fali S. Nariman said Jaya had not received any remuneration for holding a post under the Uttar Pradesh government, the court said what is relevant is whether the holder is entitled to any remuneration.

Pointing out that the apex court had in one case observed to the contrary, Nariman requested the court to clarify the legal position as several complaints were pending before the Election Commission.

The court, however, indicated that it was not willing to have a re-look at the law settled by the court, adding that the observations made by a three-judge bench (the one referred to by Nariman) “is of no avail”.

The court made it clear that the actual making of profit was not necessary. The amount of such profit was also immaterial.

There was no merit in the contention that Jaya had not taken any remuneration as the chairperson of the Uttar Pradesh Film Development Council, the bench said.

Jaya had requested the court to declare the disqualification order of the President on the recommendations of the Election Commission as “null and void”.