The Supreme Court on Monday agreed to hear a petition on November 17 seeking contempt of court proceedings against the Telangana Assembly Speaker for allegedly not disposing of disqualification petitions against BRS MLAs who defected to the Congress despite the Supreme Court setting a three-month deadline in July.
On July 31, a bench of CJI Gavai and Justice AG Masih BRS MLAs asked the Telangana CM to take a decision on the petitions seeking disqualification of the 10 MLAs, who defected to the Congress party, expeditiously and not later than three months.
“The Speaker has not taken up the matter, nor initiated any proceedings. The MLAs are still ongoing. Their Lordships are of the view that if any MLA tries to prolong the proceedings, adverse inferences will be drawn,” the counsel representing the petitioner told the bench headed by Chief Justice of India B R Gavai.
The other side is trying to prolong the proceedings and delay them until the end of the month “for obvious reasons,” the lawyer added, apparently referring to the retirement of CJI Gavai on November 23.
“The Supreme Court will not close its doors after November 24,” CJI Gavai replied while agreeing to be heard on November 17.
In the July 31 ruling, the Supreme Court said that the primary objective of the anti-defection law is to curb the evil of political defections, and that the sole purpose of assigning the adjudicating role to the Telangana president is to avoid delay and ensure speedy decision on disqualification requests. The court said that the Speaker, as the arbiter of disqualification requests, does not enjoy any “constitutional immunity.”
The Supreme Court also asked the Telangana CM not to allow the MLAs, against whom disqualification petitions have been filed, to prolong the proceedings and said that an adverse inference could be drawn against any MLA who attempts any delaying tactic.
Story continues below this ad
The Supreme Court ruling noted that the Telangana President did not even issue notice on the petitions seeking his disqualification for nearly seven months. “If we do not issue any directions, it will be tantamount to allowing the Speaker to repeat the widely criticized position of successful operation and dead patient,” the court said.
Pointing out the frequent instances of Speakers allegedly sitting in disqualification proceedings, the Supreme Court also asked Parliament to review the existing mechanism provided in the Tenth Schedule of the Constitution.
“Although we do not have any advisory jurisdiction, it is for Parliament to consider whether the mechanism of entrusting the Speaker/President with the important task of deciding the question of disqualification on grounds of defection serves the purpose of effectively combating political defections or not. If we are to preserve the foundation of our democracy and the principles that underpin it, it must be examined whether the existing mechanism is adequate or not. At the cost of repetition, we note that Parliament must extend the call for this,” the Supreme Court said in its July 31 order.
The BRS initially moved the Telangana High Court, where a single judge gave the Speaker four weeks to fix a timeline for hearing the disqualification petitions. On an appeal filed by the Speaker, the bench set aside the order of the single judge and asked the Speaker to dispose of the petitions within a reasonable time. The Supreme Court set aside the bench’s order
© Indian Express Company Limited
(tags for translation) Keywords: Chief Justice Telangana
