Allow Cookies!
By using our website, you agree to the use of cookies
The disqualified Member of Karantaka Legislative Assembly filed petitions challenging their disqualification by the former speaker Mr. Rakesh Kumar under the Anti-defection Law in the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. The bench comprised of Hon'ble Mr. Justice N.V Ramana, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Rastogi and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mohan M. Shantanagouda. Hon'ble Mr. Justice Shantanagouda recused from the case on the pretext that he is from Karantaka and his conscience does not allow him to hear this case.
Kipal Sibal appearing on behalf of the speaker insisted the Hon'ble Judge to continue with the hearing but after discussions with fellow judges, it was decided that the hearing will take place on next monday as Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mohan M. Shantanagouda was firm in his decision to bow out.
The petitioner contended that their fundamental right under Article 19 to carry on trade, business and profession. Their right to resign from the post of Member of Legislative Assembly (MLA) and carry on any vocation of their choice including public service cannot be denied by the respondent speaker by illegal and unconstitutional order. This, the action of the speaker is in violation of fundamental rights under Article 19 and 21 of the constitution. The legislators have argued that the speaker has concluded their resignation was neither voluntary not genuine. The court has asked for the records related to their resignation. They have contended that their disqualification is not in consonance with Rule 6 and 7 of the Karnataka Legislative Assembly that deals with disqualification of Members on ground of defection 1986.
They submitted their resignations on July 6 and came personally on July 11 to submit the same before the speaker. Under Article 190 of the Constitution read with Rule 202 of Karnataka Legislative Assembly, a member can submit his resignation signed in his own hand and the speaker has to satisfy himself only about genuineness and voluntariness of the resignation.
They have blamed the speaker for adopting a 'pick and choose policy'. They argued that the speaker slipped out of his office when they submitted their resignation. Also, on July 11 he did not comply when Hon'ble Supreme Court asked him to decide upon the resignations. On July 18, the floor test was unnecessarily delayed.
86540
103860
630
114
59824