Congress leader P Chidmabaram, in a Twitter post on Saturday, spotlighted an old Supreme Court ruling, which he says is in “simple English”, to explain that courts cannot judicially review disqualification proceedings under the Tenth Schedule (anti-defection law) of the Constitution until the Speaker makes a final decision on the merits of the case.
On Friday, the Sachin Pilot camp got a partial relief when the Rajasthan high court ordered maintenance of the status quo on the disqualification notices issued by Speaker CP Joshi to the group. Earlier, the court had also asked the Speaker to defer the decision in the matter till July 24.
Meanwhile, refusing the Speakers’ plea, the Supreme Court allowed the state high court to rule on the validity of the anti-defection notices. But the decision in the state high court will be subject to the final decision in the top court as it involves the larger question whether a legislator’s voice can be shut down.
The Congress leader said the common man, “mystified” by the orders of the high court, can take recourse to this passage by the top court in the Kihoto Hollohan case in 1992.
“In 1992, the SC ruled: “Having regard to the constitutional scheme in the Tenth Schedule, judicial review should not cover any stage prior to the making of a decision by the Speakers/Chairmen; and no quia timet actions are permissible.
{{/usCountry}}“In 1992, the SC ruled: “Having regard to the constitutional scheme in the Tenth Schedule, judicial review should not cover any stage prior to the making of a decision by the Speakers/Chairmen; and no quia timet actions are permissible.
{{/usCountry}}“Those words are simple and clear enough. That statement of the law by 5 judges was binding on all courts, HC or SC. Now, dear average citizen, you be the judge,” said Chidambaram in a Twitter post.
Sachin Pilot, who was sacked as Rajasthan deputy CM and also as the pradesh unit chief last week, and his 18 MLAs were served the notices after the Congress requested the Speaker, citing the MLAs’ absence from successive Congress Legislature Party (CLP) meetings defying a party whip and also and hatching a conspiracy to bring down the state government.
The rebel leader has maintained that he is not joining the BJP.
The Pilot camp has argued that mere disagreement with the CM’s working style cannot be construed to be defection. Issuing such a notice is also a violation of their freedom of speech right. Also, that the whip applies when the House is in session and not outside, the MLAs argued.
The Speaker, on his part, contended that a writ petition in the matter is premature as a decision is yet to be taken on disqualifying MLAs. Additionally, what conduct invites disqualification under the Tenth Schedule is the sole preserve of the Speaker.