Supreme Court in New Delhi
Reuters
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday said that the Tenth Schedule of the Constitution, the anti-defection law, concerning provisions as to disqualification on the ground of defection, was brought only to avoid 'Aaya Ram Gaya Ram'.
A bench of Justices B R Gavai and Augustine George Masih sought to know if constitutional courts cannot direct the Speaker to decide disqualification petitions filed under the Tenth Schedule, of the Constitution within a specified period. The Speaker acts as quasi-judicial tribunals under the anti-defection law.
The apex court was hearing arguments on pleas filed by Bharat Rashtra Samithi leaders, including K T Rama Rao and Padi Kaushik Reddy, seeking timely action by the Telangana Assembly Speaker on disqualification proceedings pending against 10 MLAs, who defected to the Congress.
During the hearing, the bench said it is not going into the merits of the matter, and it is only considering the question whether a High Court could ask the Speaker to act within a particular time to decide on the pleas seeking disqualification of lawmakers.
“We are only on the question as to whether a High Court can.... when the Speaker does not exercise his jurisdiction, direct the Speaker to act in accordance with law within a particular period,” the bench said.
Senior advocate C A Sundaram, representing the BRS leader Padi Kaushik Reddy, submitted that the “Constitution stands above all of us” and it was the constitutional duty of a court to see that the Constitution was adhered to.
He contended that the key question was whether a constitutional court has the power, authority, and jurisdiction to require a constitutional authority to act as per their constitutional mandate.
"The issue is very limited -- whether the single judge was justified in requesting the Speaker to fix a schedule within four weeks," the bench observed. The apex court said it would also examine whether the division bench was correct in interfering with the single judge's order.
Senior advocate Dama Seshadri Naidu, also representing the petitioner side, asked the bench to fix four weeks as a reasonable time for Speakers to decide disqualification petitions.
So far, the apex court had not specified what the “reasonable” time ought to be in connection with the constitutional office of the Speaker, for taking a decision on pleas related to defection.
Naidu contended that the Speaker’s attitude should not reflect that of the government in power to “win at any cost, rule at any cost”.
The court fixed the matter for further hearing on April 2.
One of the pleas’, filed in the apex court, has challenged the November 2024 verdict of the Telangana High Court in a matter concerning petitions seeking the disqualification of three BRS MLAs who defected to the ruling Congress party.
The other petition before the top court related to the remaining seven legislators who defected. The high court had said the Speaker must decide the disqualification petitions against the three MLAs within a “reasonable time”.