The Supreme Court on Wednesday agreed to hear on July 11 a petition filed by ‘Ma Foi’ K. Pandiarajan, an MLA belonging to the OPS faction of the AIADMK, seeking quashing of the February 18 confidence vote won by Chief Minister Edappadi K. Palaniswami.
A Bench led by Justice Dipak Misra also sought the aid of Attorney General K.K. Venugopal in the matter, especially on the cardinal plea of a trust vote through a secret ballot.
Mr. Pandiarajan had termed the February 18 resolution of the 234-member strong Legislative Assembly, expressing confidence in favour of the council of ministers led by Mr. Palaniswami, as “illegal, capricious, discriminatory and violative of the principle of ‘secrecy’ which is the essence of democracy, free and fair elections, and the voter’s freedom of expression”.
The writ petition filed under Article 32 through Supreme Court advocate Sunil Fernandes sought the apex court to direct the Assembly Speaker Dhanapal to conduct a fresh vote of confidence in favour of Mr. Palaniswami.
‘Undue haste’
It said that this time, it should be a secret ballot conducted in the presence of independent and impartial observers nominated by the Supreme Court.
The petition said that the public mood is against the political machinations of Sasikala and her faction within the AIADMK.
“The request for secret ballot to decide the confidence motion was rejected by the Speaker without any justifiable basis especially when there were specific averments and complaints that the MLAs belonging to the AIADMK (including some of the MLAs from the group of 11 MLAs headed by O. Panneerselvam) were placed under virtual house arrest and extreme duress and their affirmative vote during the proceedings on February 18 was obtained under the threat of force, fraud and coercion,” the petition submitted.
It alleged that Sasikala, who is now serving her sentence in the disproportionate assets case, and Chief Minister Palaniswami had “forcibly held the 122 MLAs belonging to the AIADMK Legislative Party as hostage at the Golden Bay Resort, from February 8, 2017 till the voting on February 18”.
Several habeas corpus petitions were filed by the worried relatives of the MLAs seeking their whereabouts before the Madras High Court.
“The Speaker did not accede to the reasonable request for an adjournment of the confidence motion so that the MLAs could interact with their constituencies and gauge the public mood which was definitely against the Sasikala faction.
“The undue haste with which the proceedings took place on February 18 and the complete lack of transparency and propriety shown by the Speaker in continuing with the voting process, that too not through secret ballot, are arbitrary and mala fide, and ought to be quashed,” the petition contended.
