Supreme Court Wants West Bengal Speaker To Decide Mukul Roy's Disqualification Petition Soon

The Supreme Court on Monday directed the West Bengal Legislative Assembly Speaker Biman Banerjee to decide on the disqualification petition moved against TMC MLA Mukul Roy expeditiously and accordingly adjourned the matter for further hearing to January 17, 2022. The Court was adjudicating upon a Special Leave Petition (SLP) moved by the Speaker against the order of the Calcutta High Court wherein the High Court had directed the Speaker to decide on the petition seeking Roy's disqualification under the Tenth Schedule of the Constitution for his defection from BJP to TMC and place on record the order passed by October 7. The observation had been made in the plea moved by BJP MLA Ambika Roy challenging the appointment of TMC MLA Mukul Roy as the PAC Chairman. On June 17, a disqualification petition had been moved before the Speaker by BJP MLA and Leader of the Opposition Suvendu Adhikari against Mukul Roy on the grounds of defection under the Tenth Schedule of the Constitution. A Bench comprising former Acting Chief Justice Rajesh Bindal and Justice Rajarshi Bharadwaj of the Calcutta High Court vide order dated September 28 had also observed that it is a 'constitutional convention' to appoint a leader of the Opposition as the Chairman of the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) of the West Bengal Legislative Assembly. The Bench had ruled that the issue pertaining to disqualification of TMC MLA Mukul Roy as Member of the Legislative Assembly is co-related with him being the Chairman of the Committee on Public Accounts.On October 7, the Advocate General S.N Mookerjee had informed the High Court that the Speaker of the West Bengal Legislative Assembly had moved the Supreme Court challenging the aforementioned direction to decide on the disqualification petition against Mukul Roy. Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi appearing for the WB Legislative Assembly Speaker informed a Bench comprising Justices Nageswara Rao and Hima Kohli on Monday that the Speaker had fixed December 21 as the next date of hearing of the disqualification petition moved by Adhikari against Mukul Roy. Accordingly, the Bench recorded in its order, "We direct the Speaker, West Bengal Legislative Assembly, to decide the petition filed under the Tenth Schedule for disqualification of respondent No.2 expeditiously."Courtroom exchange At the outset, the Bench enquired from senior advocate Singhvi as to whether the High Court had passed any order on October 7 which was the date previously fixed for submitting a copy of the order passed by the Speaker regarding the disqualification petition moved against Mukul Roy. Thereafter the senior counsel apprised the Bench that the High Court had adjourned the matter on October 7 on account of the SLP filed before the Supreme Court. Furthermore, referring to the current stage of proceedings before the WB Legislative Assembly, senior advocate Singhvi informed the Bench that the Speaker was supposed to hear the matter on November 12 but had adjourned the hearing of the matter to December 21 on account of the SLP moved before the Supreme Court. Expressing reservations to such an adjournment, Justice Hima Kohli remarked, "You decide that the SLP has been filed, so you won't take a call?"Justice Kohli further referred to Para 80 of the impugned judgment wherein the High Court had observed that the issue pertaining to the disqualification of Mukul Roy as Member of the Legislative Assembly is co-related with him being the PAC Chaiman. Accordingly, she remarked further, "Should we ignore Para 80?"Senior Advocate Singhvi responded by submitting that the two issues are not connected since the petition filed before the High Court was a quo warranto writ petition and not a petition pertaining to defection under the Tenth Schedule of the Constitution. He further stated, "Will your Lordships micromanage the Speaker's calendar? He has to hear the parties". To this, Justice Kohli further remarked, "If we were to micromanage by now there would be an order. We are just trying to cull out of you the status of proceedings"Furthermore, opining on the alleged illegality of the impugned order, senior advocate Singhvi submitted that the order is 'bristling with fundamental legal errors". He further remarked that in a 69 page order, 'findings were given unknown to law'. He further expressed strong reservations to the fact that an order for deciding a disqualification petition had been given in a petition of quo warranto. Referring to Para 39 of the impugned order, the senior counsel pointed out to the Court that the High Court had ruled that the appointment of Mukul Roy as the PAC Chairman cannot be termed to be 'proceedings in the Assembly as it was merely a declaration made by the Speaker in the presence of all the Members. The senior counsel submitted that such as assertion is 'unheard in law.' He further pointed out to the Bench that pursuant to Article 212, Courts cannot inquire into proceedings of the Legislature on the ground...

Supreme Court Wants West Bengal Speaker To Decide Mukul Roy's Disqualification Petition Soon

Aaratrika Bhaumik

Tags