A group or sub-group of MLAs cannot appeal on behalf of a decision taken by an institutional entity like State Assembly.
Basing his arguments on this point, senior counsel Abhishek Singhvi said the 12 TRS MLAs had no locus standi in their appeal before a division bench of the Hyderabad High Court challenging a single judge order setting aside expulsion of two Congress MLAs. He presented extensive arguments before the bench comprising acting Chief Justice Ramesh Ranganathan and Justice K.Vijaya Lakshmi on behalf of the Congress MLAs Komatireddy Venkat Reddy and S.A.Sampath Kumar.
Mr. Singhvi said no public interest was involved in the appeal made by the 12 TRS MLAs. “It is the State Legislature as an entity which is the custodian of public interest and not these 12 TRS MLAs,” he argued. He observed that the bench should not extend a helping hand to those MLAs who were acting as proxies to some persons.
Supporting the single judge order that had set aside expulsion of the two MLAs, he said it was based on the principles of natural justice as the two MLAs were not given an opportunity to give their version. As the lawyer for the 12 petitioners (TRS MLAs) Vaidyanathan cited some points from Alagapuram case, Mr. Singhvi too picked up points from the same case to substantiate his clients’contention.
“In Alagapuram case, the legislators were not expelled. They were just suspended. The MLAs were heard by the House. Even video footage was examined by the privileges committee,” he said. Based on these points, the case of the two Congress MLAs was much stronger than those of the legislators in Alagapuram case whose suspension was declared null and void, he said.
In the Congress MLAs case in Telangana, the Advocate General assured the single judge to present original video footage which showed the two legislators hurling earphones at the dais. “He gave that assurance only to backtrack and the judge drew an adverse remark,” Mr. Singhvi said.
The acting Chief Justice sought his reaction over Mr. Vaidyanathan's contention that the two Congress MLAs hurling earphones at the dais damaged dignity and decorum of the House. “Did your client admit hurling earphone at the dais,” the acting Chief Justice asked. When Mr. Singhvi tried to say that was not the crucial point, the acting Chief Justice asked what if tomorrow somebody threw a mike at the bench. It triggered laughters in the court hall.
The bench asked Mr. Vaidyanathan if the video clippings presented by his clients were part of the original video recorded by the House. He replied that it was taken from the video footage which was telecast live by TV news channels.
The hearing was posted to Wednesday.
