6 months ago
3
MLCs Jayamangala Venkataramana, Karri Padmasri, Balli Kalyan Chakravarthi, Zakia Khanam, Pothula Sunitha and Marri Rajasekhar, who discontinue the YSR Congress and resigned from the Legislative Council aft the party’s electoral setback past twelvemonth but whose resignations are yet to beryllium accepted, met Council Chairman K. Moshenu Raju connected Monday urging him to instrumentality an aboriginal decision. However, Ms Khanam has reportedly withdrawn her resignation aft the meeting, pursuing the Chairman’s reflection that lone six months remained successful her word and that pressing for acceptance astatine this signifier served small purpose. She submitted a missive accordingly.
The leaders noted that immoderate among them had since joined different parties. They reminded Mr Raju that helium was required to enactment connected their resignations arsenic per norms, taking into relationship their repeated submissions that their decisions were voluntary and unchanged. They appealed to him to expedite the process, stressing that the hold had already go inordinate.
They reiterated that they had resigned of their ain accord, without power oregon inducement, and underscored that doing truthful was an workout of a law right.
Mr Venkataramana, who had moved the High Court implicit the pendency of his resignation submitted successful November 2024, informed the Chairman that the court, successful its bid connected November 27, 2025, had termed the prolonged inaction illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. He said the tribunal directed the Chairman to implicit the enquiry and instrumentality a determination preferably wrong 2 weeks, oregon wrong a period astatine the most, arsenic provided nether the Thirty-third Constitutional Amendment.
Speaking aboriginal to the media, the erstwhile YSR Congress leaders said they were incapable to recognize the Chairman’s reluctance to enactment connected their resignations and expressed anticipation that helium would present comply with the court’s direction. His continued inaction, they remarked, amounted to an maltreatment of process.
