New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Friday declined to entertain a plea challenging the Tamil Nadu Assembly Speaker’s decision to drop disqualification proceedings against 21 AIADMK MLAs who supported the TVK government during a confidence motion despite their party’s whip.
A three-judge bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V. Mohana declined to interfere with the Madras High Court’s dismissal of a public interest litigation filed by P.V. Selvakumar.
The bench, however, left the questions of law open for consideration in an appropriate proceeding.
It questioned Selvakumar’s locus standi, noting that he was neither a legislator nor an authorised representative pursuing the disqualification proceedings.
Advocate Nina Nariman, appearing for the petitioner, submitted that he was an AIADMK member and a voter concerned about the legislators’ conduct.
Justice Bagchi observed that proceedings under the Tenth Schedule of the Constitution had to be pursued by a member of the House.
“We are fully with you that the sanctity of constitutional mandate must be preserved. But we must understand the working of a democratic system,” he said.
The bench noted that the AIADMK leadership appeared to have condoned the MLAs’ conduct and said the grievance should be raised by the party or its authorised representatives.
Ms Nariman argued that the issue went beyond defiance of the party whip and involved communications submitted to the Speaker.
The court questioned whether a third party could challenge the decision after the AIADMK had chosen to pardon the legislators.
Citing an earlier Supreme Court decision, Ms Nariman said a third party could seek relief when all legislators of a party had defected. She acknowledged that the present case concerned only some of the party’s legislators.
The dispute arose after 25 AIADMK MLAs voted in favour of the TVK government led by Chief Minister C. Joseph Vijay during a confidence motion on May 13, despite being directed by their party to vote against it.
Disqualification proceedings were initiated the following day under the Tenth Schedule. The AIADMK subsequently sought withdrawal of the proceedings against 21 MLAs, which the Speaker accepted. The remaining four legislators had resigned from the party.
Selvakumar contended that the Speaker could not drop the proceedings merely because the party had changed its position, as defiance of a whip carried constitutional consequences.
The High Court dismissed the PIL, questioning his authority to challenge the decision and noting that the party had condoned the legislators’ conduct within the prescribed period.
Disclaimer : This story is auto aggregated by a computer programme and has not been created or edited by DOWNTHENEWS. Publisher: deccanchronicle.com
