4 months ago
3
“The bureau of the Speaker is held successful highest respect and esteem successful parliamentary traditions. The robes of the Speaker bash alteration and elevate the antheral inside.” This reflection by the Telangana Assembly Speaker, G. Prasad Kumar, was made portion dealing with the disqualification petition filed against Bharat Rashtra Samiti (BRS) MLA Arekapudi Gandhi, who is facing the complaint of having defected to the ruling Congress. The Speaker besides dismissed the petitions filed against 4 different BRS MLAs, Tellam Venkat Rao, Gudem Mahipal Reddy, T. Prakash Goud and Bandla Krishnamohan Reddy.
The Speaker was acting arsenic the president of the Tribunal to woody with the disqualification petitions filed by the BRS enactment against 10 of its MLAs, who allegedly defected to the Congress, aft winning successful the December 2023 elections. The Speaker has kept successful abeyance the determination connected 3 e MLAs. He has not conducted hearings for 2 different MLAs contempt repeated requests by the BRS.
The Speaker made an absorbing reflection astir the petition which claimed that the responsive (Mr. Gandhi) had “voluntarily gave up his rank of the BRS by joining the Indian National Congress”. Here, the Speaker dealt with the locus standi of the petitioners (the BRS legislators) to record the disqualification petitions. This acrophobic the contented whether a disqualification petition against a sitting MLA alleging defection indispensable beryllium filed lone by a idiosyncratic duly authorised to bash truthful and successful penning by the enactment connected whose B-Form the legislator was elected, oregon whether immoderate different idiosyncratic excessively has the locus standi to record specified a petition adjacent without specifying the capableness successful which it is filed.
The Speaker said that since objections astir the contented repeatedly originate during disqualification proceedings, peculiarly wherever 1 MLA sought the disqualification of different who had allegedly defected connected grounds that were much retired of governmental vendetta oregon implicit interior differences, it was due that the Tribunal settled this contented archetypal earlier proceeding to reply different questions.
Citing Rule 3(1)(a) of the Rules, 1986 and Rule 3(4), helium said: “Admittedly, the petitioner did not authorities successful what capableness helium filed the petition oregon however helium acquired the close of action, arsenic helium is neither a elector of the constituency from which the responsive was elected nor specifically authorised successful penning by the BRS party.”
The Speaker did not origin successful the reflection made by the Supreme Court of India, successful the Speaker of Odisha Legislative Assembly vs Utkal Keshari Parida which raised the locus standi of a non-member of the House successful submitting a petition for disqualification. The Court had held that “not lone a subordinate of the House, but immoderate idiosyncratic funny would besides beryllium entitled to bring to the announcement of the Speaker the information that a Member of the House had incurred disqualification nether the Tenth Schedule of the Constitution of India.” The reflection assumes value arsenic each the petitioners who filed their disqualification pleas with the Speaker are Members of the Assembly representing the BRS.
The mode successful which the petitions person been dismissed has drawn the ire of the BRS and the Bharatiya Janata Party (which described the verdict arsenic “unilateral”). The parties person alleged that the Speaker was acting astatine the behest of the Chief Minister, A. Revanth Reddy, and was successful enactment with the Chief Minister’s claims that determination was nary scope for immoderate bypolls. The BRS has said that it volition research ineligible avenues aft a thorough survey of the Speaker’s verdict based connected the Supreme Court’s reflection that the Speaker of a State Assembly does not bask law immunity portion acting arsenic an adjudicating authorization successful disqualification petitions.
The enactment successful delivering the verdict pertaining to disqualification petitions filed against 5 of the 10 MLAs appears mostly driven by the deadline acceptable by the Supreme Court. The Court, portion dealing with the petitions filed by the BRS leaders, had said it was astir clip that Parliament reviewed its anticipation that Assembly Speakers and Chairmen would unrecorded up to the dignity of their precocious bureau and crush the “evil of governmental defection” by deciding disqualification proceedings against legislators successful clip and without favour.
With the determination connected disqualification petitions pending against the different MLAs, it remains to beryllium seen what happens next.
rajeev.madabhushi@thehindu.co.in
