The Supreme Court Thursday allowed the Rajasthan supreme court to pronounce order on plea of 19 dissident Congress MLAs, including sacked deputy CM Sachin Pilot, against the Assembly Speaker’s notice for initiating disqualification proceedings against them, but said that it might be subject to the result of the petition before the highest court.
Rajasthan Assembly Speaker CP Joshi however did not get any interim relief on his plea alleging that the supreme court cannot interdict the disqualification proceedings undertaken by him under 10th schedule of the Constitution.
A bench of Justices Arun Mishra, B R Gavai and Krsihna Murari said Joshi’s plea raises important questions and requires prolonged hearing.
We aren’t restraining the supreme court from passing the order but it’ll be subject to the result of the petition (of Speaker) before the Supreme Court, the bench said, while fixing the plea for hearing on July 27.
Voice of dissent in democracy can’t be pack up , the bench observed
We try to seek out out whether this process (disqualification) was permissible or not,” it said, while questioning Joshi on the explanations for initiating disqualification proceedings against the 19 dissident Congress MLAs.
Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Joshi, listed the explanations for starting the disqualification proceedings, saying that these MLAs didn’t attend party meetings and conspired to destabilise their own government.
The bench said: this is often not an easy matter and these MLAs are elected representatives.”
Responding to a question of the bench, Sibal said, These MLAs had gone to Haryana, stayed at a hotel and gave TV bites that they need floor test.”
He said the difficulty on whether the disqualification process is permissible or not can’t be taken note of by the court at this stage. Our grievance is only constitutional and there can’t be any order till decision is taken by the speaker.”
Sibal said that at the foremost the Speaker are often asked to make a decision disqualification within a time-frame but the method cannot be interfered with and no writ can mislead challenge proceedings before Speaker before the choice on disqualification or suspension of MLAs.
The bench asked Sibal whether a disqualification notice are often issued to MLAs for not attending the meetings and may it’s taken as stand against the party.
The observation came when Sibal said that there was a notice issued by the Chief Whip of the party to all or any MLAs to attend the meetings.
At the outset, Joshi told the highest court that the state supreme court has no jurisdiction to restrain him from conducting disqualification proceedings till July 24 against 19 dissident Congress MLAs, including sacked deputy chief minister Sachin Pilot.
Sibal mentioned a famous top court verdict rendered within the 1992 Kihoto Hollohan case, during which it had been held that courts can’t intervene in disqualification proceedings undertaken by the Speaker under Tenth Schedule to the Constitution.
He said courts could only intervene when the Speaker takes a choice to suspend or disqualify a member of the House.
Sibal’s response came when the bench asked him whether courts couldn’t intervene in the least if the Speaker suspended or disqualified a lawmaker.
