The Supreme Court on Monday issued a contempt notice to the Telangana Speaker after he failed to decide within the stipulated three months, from July 31 to October 30, the petition by BRS MLA Kaushik Reddy seeking the disqualification of 10 MLAs who defected to the Congress.
Issuing a warning, the Court said that he could face contempt proceedings if he did not act within two weeks. “It was for him (Telangana Speaker) whether he wants to decide the matter or face contempt of the court…. this is gross contempt of the court,” said a bench headed by CJI BR Gavai.
On 31 July, the Court had instructed the Speaker to decide within three months on the disqualification of the 10 MLAs who joined the ruling Congress party.
During Monday’s hearing, the CJI issued notices in all matters, returnable in two weeks, and directed the Speaker to conclude the process within that period or face contempt. The Court reiterated that the Speaker does not enjoy constitutional immunity when deciding such matters.
The CJI also signalled at possible consequences, remarking that the Speaker would have to decide “where he has to celebrate his NYE (New Year’s Eve).” While previously allowing petitions filed by BRS leaders KT Rama Rao, Padi Kaushik Reddy and KO Vivekanand, the bench had made the observation that political defections were a matter of national concern and, if not curbed, could deter the economy.
“We are inclined to allow the present appeal. November 22, 2024 order passed by the Division Bench is set aside. The disqualification proceedings against 10 MLAs are to be decided as expeditiously as possible and within 3 months. No MLA shall be allowed to protract the proceedings. If done so, then Speaker shall draw adverse inferences,” the Court had said.
Setting aside the Telangana High Court’s earlier order on scheduling hearings, the Supreme Court made it clear that no MLA should be allowed to delay disqualification cases.
The bench said Parliament should reconsider how MLA disqualification is handled, pointing out that Speakers often slow down these cases. This, the Court warned, weakens action against defecting MLAs and harms democracy.
The petitions filed by BRS leaders asked the Speaker to act quickly on pending disqualification pleas. The Court noted it was “unfortunate” that the Speaker issued notices seven months after the petitions were filed — and only after the Supreme Court stepped in.
The Court repeated that when the Speaker handles disqualification under the Tenth Schedule, he acts like a tribunal and is fully subject to High Court and Supreme Court review. “The Speaker, while acting as a tribunal under the Tenth Schedule, does not have constitutional immunity,” it said.
The Supreme Court also told the Speaker not to let the MLAs facing disqualification drag the case. Any deliberate delay, it said, can lead to adverse findings.