The Election Commission of India on Monday told the Supreme Court that an Assembly Speaker cannot deprive disqualified Karnataka legislators from contesting bypolls even as the former MLAs urged the court to grant interim relief.
Appearing before a Bench led by Justice N.V. Ramana, the former legislators, represented by senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, asked the court to either stay the notification issued on Saturday as regards byelections to 15 Karnataka Assembly constituencies or, in the alternative, give them permission to contest the polls in October.
Role of Speaker
Senior advocate Rakesh Dwivedi, for the ECI, said there is “much to say” in the manner in which the former MLAs were disqualified from the House by former Karnataka Assembly Speaker K.R. Ramesh Kumar on the charge of violating the anti-defection law.
The Bench finally agreed to examine the plea made by the former Congress and Janata Dal (Secular) legislators for interim relief. The byelections are due on October 21. The last date for nominations for the polls is September 30.
The former Speaker, represented by senior advocates Kapil Sibal and Devadatt Kamat, objected to the plea for interim relief. Mr. Sibal said any interim relief given now would become infructuous if the final verdict is in favour of the disqualification.
The Bench, which issued notice to Mr. Kumar, asked him to file a response and subsequently argue on the question of grant of interim relief on Thursday.
“Mr. Sibal, please limit your arguments to the question of interim relief only,” Justice Ramana observed.
The former legislators, including Pratapgouda Patil and A.H. Vishwanath, had earlier approached the apex court jointly and separately against their disqualification. Their separate petitions have also Congress Legislature Party leader Siddaramaiah and State Congress president Dinesh Gundurao, former Karnataka Chief Minister H.D. Kumaraswamy as respondents. They were also issued notices by the court.
Fundamental right
The petitions have urged the court to set aside the former Speaker’s decision to disqualify them from the Karnataka Legislative Assembly.
“The petitioners have a fundamental right under Article 19 to carry on any trade, business and profession. Their right to resign from the post of MLA and carry on any vocation of their choice including public service cannot be denied by the Respondent Speaker by a completely illegal and unconstitutional order. The action of the Speaker is thus in violation of the fundamental rights of the Petitioners guaranteed under Articles 19 and 21,” they have argued.
They have also challenged the then Speaker’s conclusion that their resignations were neither voluntary nor genuine. The legislators asked the apex court to call for the records of the proceedings pertaining to their resignation and disqualification.
The legislators argued that the disqualification order under the Tenth Schedule was not in consonance with the Rules 6 and 7 of the Karnataka Legislative Assembly (Disqualification of Members on Ground of Defection) Rules of 1986. They said the actions of the former Speaker were wholly arbitrary and unreasonable and in violation of Article 14 of the Constitution.
Submitted twice
Besides, they argued, not only had they submitted their resignations on July 6, they repeated the act by coming in person again on July 11 before the Speaker to submit their resignations.
Under Article 190 of the Constitution, read with Rule 202 of the Karnataka Legislative Assembly, a member can deliver a resignation signed in his own hand and the Speaker is only to satisfy himself about genuineness and voluntariness of the resignation, they contended.
The legislators further blamed the former Speaker for adopting a “pick-and-choose” policy.
The petitions said the then Speaker had slipped out of his office when the legislators went to tender their resignations on July 6. The Speaker did not comply when the Supreme Court, on July 11, asked him to decide the resignations on the same day. The floor test, which was supposed to be held on July 18, was unduly delayed.