Latest News
Back
Document:
Manipur High Court: If an individual already works for a political party, he or she does not have the authority to change or work for another party.
Facts of the Case:
According to the current writ petition, the Manipur Legislative Assembly Election was held on 04.03.2017 and 08.03.2017. The results of these elections were announced on March 11, 2016, and the writ petitioner was elected as a National Congress representative to the 11th Assembly of Manipur (INC). On March 11, 2016, the election results were announced, and an elected member of Manipur's 11th Legislative Assembly was named the applicant as an Indian National Congress legislator. On March 11, 2016, the election results were announced, and an elected member of Manipur's 11th Legislative Assembly was named the applicant as an Indian National Congress politician (INC). The name of the writ petitioner was mentioned as a Member elected and a party affiliate stated Indian National Congress at Sl. No. 37-Kakchings Assembly Constituency in the extraordinary Manipur Gazette on 14.03.2017. (INC). The petitioner was then elected as a member of the 11th Manipur Legislative Assembly to the Indian National Congress by the Pro-Tem Speaker on March 19, 2017. (INC). He was then disqualified under Article 191 (2) of the Indian Constitution and Para 2 (1) (a) of the Tenth Schedule to the Indian Constitution. The petitioner was disqualified for supporting the Bhartiya Janta Party (BJP), along with three other MLAs, Shri S. Bira, Shri O. Lukhoi, and Shri Ngamthang Haokip, for the claimed reason that he began supporting the opposing party, the Bhartiya Janta Party (BJP). It was also discovered that the petitioner donned BLP uniform during BLP-sponsored events in which he also participated. This was also reported in local newspapers, periodicals, and television stations. The respondents claim that the petitioner had already given up his membership in INC for the alleged offence. On February 7, 2020, an additional declaration of disqualification No 14 from 2019 was submitted, claiming that the writ petitioner had registered as an active primary BJP member in Manipur Pradesh and on the membership application formula. Since 2017, the petitioner has claimed to be a member of the BJP, proclaiming to be the 6061st member.
Arguments by Petitioner:
Learned Counsel’s on behalf of the petitioner submitted their arguments on the following 4 (four) grounds:
The learned senior counsel further submitted that a notice dated 17.06.2020 and a cause-list dated 18.06.2020 were secretly published during the midnight hours, however, the aforesaid notice dated 17.06.2020 and cause-list dated 18.06.2020 was never served either to the writ petitioner or to the counsel of the writ petitioner. According to the learned senior counsel appearing for the writ petitioner, the disqualification case filed against the writ petitioner was fixed for further proceedings on 17.06.2020 by an order dated 06.06.2020 passed by the Speaker after the miscellaneous application raising preliminary objections about the maintainability of the disqualification petitions was dismissed.
that the Speaker's actions in passing the contested order, dated 18.06.2020, were malafide;
that when passing the contested order, the Speaker was motivated by perversity;
It was also claimed that on June 18, 2020, in cases of disqualification, the Speaker, with a sense of total lawlessness and a deeper sense of surprise, took a contradictory, differing, and political stance, disqualifying three MLAs, including the current petitioner, while rejecting cases of disqualification filed against four other MLAs, despite the fact that the total number of MLAs was seven.
that the Speaker of the House has disobeyed the Constitution's mandate;
In violation of the Constitution, the Speaker's Order in WP(C) No. 298 of 2020, dated 18.06.2020, for maintaining compliance, had casually neglected the notification of an order reserved for disqualification cases.
Arguments by Respondents:
The petitioner and other BJP members in his local region also participated in various political activities and events organised by the BJP in order to establish himself as a BJP member, according to the Learned Counsel. Furthermore, the writ petitioner does not expressly deny that it was encouraged to voluntarily surrender its INC membership and join the BJP through a reception ceremony in 2020, with the participation of three other INC MLAs, and that such events were widely publicised in both print and electronic media. The arguments in that disqualification case had made specific and unequivocal comments concerning a writ petitioner's behaviour and instances in which the petitioner willfully abandoned his membership in the National Indigenous Congress (INC) and joined the BJP, according to the statement.
Held
The Court stated that the present writ petition is filed and dismissed as such with reference to the Tenth (10th) Schedule of the Constitution of India, based on all of the foregoing conclusions.
Document:
