Supreme Court Takes Strong Stand Against Telangana Speaker
The Supreme Court of India has issued a formal contempt notice against the Telangana Legislative Assembly Speaker for failing to comply with its direct order to decide on disqualification petitions involving 10 Bharat Rashtra Samithi (BRS) legislators. The court expressed severe displeasure at what it termed as the "grossest kind of contempt" of its judicial authority.
Background of the Constitutional Confrontation
This legal confrontation stems from a July ruling by the apex court, where a bench led by Chief Justice BR Gavai had explicitly ordered the Speaker to deliver a verdict within three months regarding the disqualification of the BRS MLAs who had defected to the ruling Congress party. The three-month deadline has since expired without any decision being rendered.
During Monday's hearing, the CJI-led bench did not mince words when addressing the non-compliance. "This should have been concluded...This is the grossest kind of contempt...It is for him to decide where he wants to celebrate the new year," Chief Justice Gavai remarked sternly, indicating the seriousness with which the court views this matter.
Legal Proceedings and Speaker's Defense
The Speaker's office, represented by senior advocates Mukul Rohatgi and Abhishek Singhvi, along with lawyer Sravan Kumar, sought an additional eight weeks to make rulings on the disqualification petitions. They informed the court that hearings for four disqualification petitions were already concluded, and evidence recording was completed in three cases.
Despite the strong language used, the bench showed some consideration by granting exemption to the Telangana Speaker and other parties from personal court attendance until further notice. The court has adjourned the matter for further hearing in four weeks.
Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi assured the bench that he would personally convey the court's grave concerns to the Speaker's office and expressed hope that decisions would be made within the next four weeks.
Constitutional Significance of the Ruling
The Supreme Court reiterated a crucial constitutional principle during these proceedings: the Speaker acts as a tribunal when deciding disqualification pleas under the Tenth Schedule of the Constitution, and therefore does not enjoy "constitutional immunity" from judicial oversight.
This case originated from the Supreme Court's July 31 judgment, delivered by a bench comprising the CJI and Justice AG Masih, responding to writ petitions submitted by BRS leaders KT Rama Rao, Padi Kaushik Reddy, and KO Vivekanand. The Tenth Schedule of the Constitution contains the anti-defection law that regulates disqualification of legislators who switch parties.
The court had previously agreed on November 10 to hear the contempt petition against the Telangana Speaker, scheduling it for November 17, which led to Monday's significant developments.
