JOIN USRajasthan Congress chief whip moves SC against status quo on disqualification of Sachin Pilot and rebel MLAs
After the Rajasthan Speaker, Congress Legislature Party's chief whip Mahesh Joshi has moved the Supreme Court challenging the July 24 order of status quo by the High Court on disqualification notice issued against Sachin Pilot and 18 other rebel MLAs.
In his petition, Joshi contended that the HC's order is "ex facie unconstitutional, illegal and in the teeth of the settled law laid down by this Court in Kihoto Hollohan vs Zachillhu (1992)".
The top court's Constitution bench had then held that judicial review was not available at a stage prior to the adjudication by the Speaker on the proceedings related to the anti-defection law.
The petition settled by senior advocate Devadatt Kamat and drafted by advocates Rajesh Inamdar, Javedur Rahman, Aditya Bhat, Amit Pai and Varun K Chopra asked the court to allow appeal against the HC's order and grant immediate stay on the hearing over there.
The HC had then ordered status quo on disqualification notice issued by the Speaker C P Joshi on July 14 to Pilot and 18 other Congress MLAs on their failure to attend the legislature party meetings. It had decided to examine larger issue including one related to the right to voice dissent.
The Speaker had already filed a petition challenging the validity of July 24 order by the HC.
The Congress party's chief whip, in his plea, contended that interdicting the Speaker at the stage of notice effaced the very purpose and intent of the Tenth Schedule. "The order which constricts and restricts the jurisdiction of the Speaker to even adjudicate on the disqualification petitions is plainly illegal, unconstitutional and in the teeth of settled principles of law laid down by this court," his petition states.
The consequence of the grant of status quo order is that the dissident MLAs have secured relief over and above their original grievance that the Speaker did not give them seven days time, he added.
He pointed out the constitutional validity of the Tenth Schedule (anti-defection law) has been challenged before the High Court, which entertained the "pre-mature" matter, even though the Supreme Court, in Kihoto Hollohan’s case, has upheld the validity of the statute.
Joshi also raised questions of law, including if the High Court over-reached its powers of judicial review of Tenth Schedule proceedings as laid down in a catena of judgments by the Supreme Court.