<p class="title">The top court has held that disqualification proceedings initiated against a legislator would not end on his or her tendering resignation.</p>.<p class="bodytext">“Disqualification relates back to the date when the act of defection takes place. Factum and taint of disqualification do not vaporise by tendering a resignation letter to the Speaker,” the court said.</p>.<p class="bodytext">The court rejected a contention by the disqualified MLAs that the disqualification proceedings against them could not have continued since they had resigned.</p>.<p class="bodytext">“Even if the resignation is tendered, the act resulting in disqualification arising prior to the resignation does not come to an end,” the bench said.</p>
<p class="title">The top court has held that disqualification proceedings initiated against a legislator would not end on his or her tendering resignation.</p>.<p class="bodytext">“Disqualification relates back to the date when the act of defection takes place. Factum and taint of disqualification do not vaporise by tendering a resignation letter to the Speaker,” the court said.</p>.<p class="bodytext">The court rejected a contention by the disqualified MLAs that the disqualification proceedings against them could not have continued since they had resigned.</p>.<p class="bodytext">“Even if the resignation is tendered, the act resulting in disqualification arising prior to the resignation does not come to an end,” the bench said.</p>