The Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly Speaker, JCD Prabhakar, on Monday (August 17), informed the Madras High Court that he had accepted the resignation of six MLAs belonging to the All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (AIADMK), after being satisfied that their resignations were voluntary. 

The bench of Chief Justice SA Dharmadhikari and Justice G Arul Murugan was hearing a plea filed by the whip of the AIADMK party, Agri SS Krishnamurthy and others, challenging the acceptance of the resignation of 6 MLAs - S Jayakumar, Maragatham Kumaravel, P Sathyabama, Dr Esakki Subbaya, C Vijaya Bhaskar, and MR Vijayabhaskar, who won from the AIADMK party but later resigned from the party and joined CM Joseph Vijay's Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK) party.

Through an affidavit, the Speaker stated that when the resignations were handed over to him, he had inquired with each MLA to determine whether their decision to resign was voluntary or not. He further submitted that the resignations were accepted after being satisfied that it was made in free will and of their own volition and that there was no element of undue influence or coercion behind their decision to resign.

He also stated that at the time of resignation, there was nothing to show that the resignation was not voluntary. Further, it was submitted that at the time of tendering resignation, the conduct and demeanour of the parties did not give any impression that they were being coerced or forced in any manner to tender their resignation.

It was thus argued that the resignation was accepted after following the procedure as stipulated under the proviso to Article 190(3)(b) of the Constitution and Rule 22 of the Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly Rules, and the same suffered no legal or constitutional infirmities.

In the previous hearing, Senior Advocate V Giri, appearing for the AIADMK party, had argued that the Speaker has no "constitutional immunity" from appearing before the Court. It was argued that the court could not accept the counter filed by the Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly Secretary on behalf of the Speaker, without the latter submitting himself to the court's jurisdiction. It was argued that the plea raised questions which needed to be answered by the Speaker.