Supreme Court Directs Telangana Speaker To Decide On Disqualification Of BRS MLAs Who Defected To INC Within 3 Months

In the matter relating to the defection of ten BRS MLAs in Telangana to the Congress party, the Supreme Court on Thursday (July 31) directed the Speaker of the Telangana Legislative Assembly to decide the petitions seeking their disqualification under the Tenth Schedule of the Constitution within a period of three months from today.The Court observed that it cannot allow a situation of "operation successful, but patient died" by allowing the disqualification petitions to remain pending during the term of the assembly, allowing the defectors to reap the benefits of the delay. Noting that the Speaker had not even issued notice on the disqualification petitions for nearly seven months, the Supreme Court observed :"The question therefore we ask ourselves is whether the Speaker has acted in an expeditious manner. Expeditiousness was one of the reasons why the Parliament has entrusted the important task of adjudicating disqualification petitions to the Speaker/Chairman. Non-issuance of notice for a period of seven months and issuing notice only after either the proceedings were filed before this Court or after this Court has heard the matter for the first time can be, by any stretch of imagination, envisaged as acting in an expeditious manner."The Court said that the failure to issue directions to the Speaker in the facts and circumstances of this case would frustrate the very objective of the Tenth Schedule of the Constitution. "If we do not issue any directions, it will amount to allowing the Speaker to repeat the widely criticised situation of "operation successful, patient dead"", the Court observed.The Court observed that the Speaker, while acting as a Tribunal under the tenth schedule, does not enjoy any "constitutional immunity".The Court also directed the Speaker not to allow the MLAs, who face the disqualification petitions, to protract the proceedings. If the MLAs make any such delaying tactics, adverse inference can be drawn against them, the Court added.Allowing the petitions filed by BRS leaders KT Rama Rao, Padi Kaushik Reddy and KO Vivekanand, the Court set aside the judgment of the division bench of the Telangana High Court, which nullified the single bench direction to the Speaker to fix the schedule of hearing within four weeks.A bench of CJI BR Gavai and Justice AG Masih delivered the verdict.At the outset, the CJI referred to the statements and objections of the Constitution 52nd Amendment Act, introducing the anti-defection law, which was quoted as : "The evil of political defections has been a matter of national concern. If it is not combated, it is likely to undermine the very foundations of our democracy."The only purpose of entrusting the role of adjudication to the Speaker of the Legislature was to avoid delay tactics in the Courts of law and to ensure expeditious decisions on disqualification petitions before the end of the term of the assembly, the bench noted. Referring to the ratio of the decision in Kihoto Hollohan (which upheld the tenth schedule), the Court noted that the powers of judicial review over the decisions of the Speaker were in a narrow compass; at the same time, it was also held that the decisions of the Speaker were not completely immune to judicial review.It was also held in Kihoto Hollohan, while orders injuncting the Speaker from deciding the matters were not permissible, judicial orders which aid the expeditious decisions by Speakers were allowed. Also, the Constitution Bench never envisaged a situation where Speakers would keep disqualification petitions pending for years.Reference was made to the judgment in Keisham Meghachandra Singh which held that Speakers must decide the disqualification petitions within three months. The Court also noted directions which were issued to the Maharashtra Speaker to decide the ShivSena and NCP defection petitions in a time-bound manner.The Court however rejected the petitioners' prayer that the Court itself should decide the disqualification petitions, referring to the precedents in Kihoto Hollohan and Subhash Desai.Parliament urged to reconsider whether Speaker should be allowed to decide disqualification The bench also urged the Parliament to reconsider whether the present mechanism of entrusting the Speaker/Chairman to decide disqualification petitions was conducive to curbing the menace of political defections."Though we do not possess any advisory jurisdiction, it is for the Parliament to consider whether the mechanism of entrusting the Speaker/Chairman with the important task of deciding the issue of disqualification on the ground of defection is serving the purpose of effectively combating political defections or not. If the very foundation of our democracy and the principles that sustain it are to be safeguarded, it is to be examined whether the present mechanism is sufficient or not. At the cost of repetition, we observe that it is for the Parliament to take a call on that."Orders were reserved in the matter in April...

Supreme Court Directs Telangana Speaker To Decide On Disqualification Of BRS MLAs Who Defected To INC Within 3 Months

Debby Jain

The Court observed that it cannot allow a sitaution of 'operation successful, patient died'.

Tags