<p class="title">Karnataka Assembly Speaker K R Ramesh Kumar on Friday told the Supreme Court that he was in the process of considering the resignations of the MLAs along with the proceedings under the Tenth Schedule (anti-defection law).</p>.<p class="bodytext">Maintaining that an appropriate orders would be passed "strictly in accordance with the spirit and letter of law," the Speaker also pointed out before proceeding on the writ petitions filed by the rebel MLAs, the court "ought to consider whether a direction as has been issued on July 11, could at all have been issued given the framework of our Constitution”.</p>.<p class="bodytext">In a reply affidavit, he said the writ petition filed by the MLAs was "full of blunders and distortions."</p>.<p class="bodytext">On July 11, the top court had asked the Speaker to decide on the resignations of the MLAs "forthwith or remaining part of the day." He also objected to remarks made against him that he was "making himself scarce" and had avoided meeting the MLAs who sought to resign.</p>.<p class="bodytext">"Such allegations, it is submitted, not only undermine the authority of the office of the Speaker but are absolutely fallacious to say the least and have been made only with an intent to mislead the court,” his affidavit stated.</p>.<p class="byline"><strong>Moot questions</strong></p>.<p class="bodytext">SC faces questions on maintainability of writ petitions by rebel MLAs seeking directions to Speaker for accepting their resignations.</p>.<p class="bodytext">Top court says questions of substantial importance involving the provisions of Articles 164, 190, 361B and the Tenth Schedule of the Constitution arise.</p>.<p class="bodytext">SC notes issue needs consideration if the Speaker has to decide disqualification first in case the MLAs have resigned as well.</p>
<p class="title">Karnataka Assembly Speaker K R Ramesh Kumar on Friday told the Supreme Court that he was in the process of considering the resignations of the MLAs along with the proceedings under the Tenth Schedule (anti-defection law).</p>.<p class="bodytext">Maintaining that an appropriate orders would be passed "strictly in accordance with the spirit and letter of law," the Speaker also pointed out before proceeding on the writ petitions filed by the rebel MLAs, the court "ought to consider whether a direction as has been issued on July 11, could at all have been issued given the framework of our Constitution”.</p>.<p class="bodytext">In a reply affidavit, he said the writ petition filed by the MLAs was "full of blunders and distortions."</p>.<p class="bodytext">On July 11, the top court had asked the Speaker to decide on the resignations of the MLAs "forthwith or remaining part of the day." He also objected to remarks made against him that he was "making himself scarce" and had avoided meeting the MLAs who sought to resign.</p>.<p class="bodytext">"Such allegations, it is submitted, not only undermine the authority of the office of the Speaker but are absolutely fallacious to say the least and have been made only with an intent to mislead the court,” his affidavit stated.</p>.<p class="byline"><strong>Moot questions</strong></p>.<p class="bodytext">SC faces questions on maintainability of writ petitions by rebel MLAs seeking directions to Speaker for accepting their resignations.</p>.<p class="bodytext">Top court says questions of substantial importance involving the provisions of Articles 164, 190, 361B and the Tenth Schedule of the Constitution arise.</p>.<p class="bodytext">SC notes issue needs consideration if the Speaker has to decide disqualification first in case the MLAs have resigned as well.</p>
