Telangana Speaker Rejects Disqualification Pleas Against Defecting BRS MLAs
Telangana Speaker dismisses pleas against 5 BRS MLAs, raising questions on anti-defection law.
Photo by Nick Fewings
Quick Revision
Telangana Speaker dismissed disqualification pleas
Against 5 BRS MLAs who 'defected' to Congress
Speaker cited lack of 'split' in BRS legislative party
MLAs claimed 'merger' with Congress
Key Numbers
Visual Insights
Telangana's Political Landscape & Anti-Defection Controversy (Dec 2025)
This map highlights Telangana, the state at the center of the recent anti-defection controversy. The Speaker's decision regarding BRS MLAs defecting to Congress underscores the ongoing challenges in interpreting the Anti-Defection Law and the Speaker's role.
Loading interactive map...
Exam Angles
Interpretation of the Tenth Schedule (Anti-Defection Law)
Powers and role of the Speaker/Chairman in disqualification proceedings
Judicial review of the Speaker's decision (Kihoto Hollohan case)
Impact on parliamentary democracy and party discipline
Constitutional amendments related to anti-defection
View Detailed Summary
Summary
The Telangana Assembly Speaker has dismissed disqualification petitions filed by the Bharat Rashtra Samithi (BRS) against five of its MLAs who had allegedly defected to the Congress party. The Speaker cited the lack of a 'split' in the BRS legislative party as the reason for not disqualifying them, stating that the MLAs had merely 'merged' with the Congress.
This decision has sparked debate regarding the interpretation and implementation of the Anti-Defection Law (Tenth Schedule of the Constitution), particularly concerning the powers of the Speaker and the definition of 'merger' versus 'defection'. This issue is highly relevant for UPSC GS2 (Polity & Governance) as it touches upon parliamentary democracy, party discipline, and the role of constitutional functionaries.
Background
Latest Developments
Practice Questions (MCQs)
1. Consider the following statements regarding the Anti-Defection Law in India: 1. The Tenth Schedule was added to the Constitution by the 42nd Amendment Act, 1976. 2. A member is disqualified if he voluntarily gives up the membership of his political party or votes/abstains from voting contrary to any direction issued by his political party. 3. The law provides for an exception to disqualification in case of a 'split' if one-third of the members of a legislative party defect. 4. The decision on disqualification of a member of a State Legislature under the Tenth Schedule is made by the Governor of the state. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
- A.1 and 4 only
- B.2 only
- C.2 and 3 only
- D.1, 3 and 4 only
Show Answer
Answer: B
Statement 1 is incorrect. The Tenth Schedule was added by the 52nd Amendment Act, 1985. Statement 3 is incorrect. The provision for 'split' (one-third members) was removed by the 91st Amendment Act, 2003. Now, only 'merger' (two-thirds members) is an exception. Statement 4 is incorrect. The decision on disqualification under the Tenth Schedule is made by the Speaker/Chairman of the respective House, not the Governor.
2. In the context of the Anti-Defection Law and the Speaker's role, which of the following statements is/are correct? 1. The Supreme Court, in the Kihoto Hollohan case (1992), held that the decision of the Speaker/Chairman under the Tenth Schedule is final and cannot be subjected to judicial review. 2. The 91st Constitutional Amendment Act, 2003, removed the exception for a 'split' in a political party, making 'merger' the only exception to disqualification if two-thirds of the members agree. 3. If a nominated member joins a political party after the expiry of six months from the date on which he takes his seat in the House, he is disqualified. Select the correct answer using the code given below:
- A.1 and 2 only
- B.2 and 3 only
- C.3 only
- D.1, 2 and 3
Show Answer
Answer: B
Statement 1 is incorrect. In the Kihoto Hollohan case (1992), the Supreme Court upheld the constitutional validity of the Tenth Schedule but declared that the decision of the Speaker/Chairman is subject to judicial review on grounds of malafides, perversity, etc. Statement 2 is correct. The 91st Amendment Act, 2003, indeed removed the 'split' provision (one-third members) and retained 'merger' (two-thirds members) as the only exception. Statement 3 is correct. A nominated member is allowed to join a political party within six months of taking his seat; joining after this period leads to disqualification.
3. Which of the following scenarios would NOT lead to disqualification of a Member of Parliament under the Tenth Schedule of the Constitution? 1. An independent member joins a political party after being elected. 2. A member votes in the House against the whip issued by his political party without prior permission. 3. Two-thirds of the members of a political party's legislative wing decide to merge with another political party. 4. A nominated member joins a political party within three months of taking his seat in the House. Select the correct answer using the code given below:
- A.1 and 2 only
- B.3 and 4 only
- C.1, 2 and 4 only
- D.1, 3 and 4 only
Show Answer
Answer: B
Statement 1 would lead to disqualification. An independent member is disqualified if he joins any political party after his election. Statement 2 would lead to disqualification. Voting against the party whip (or abstaining) without prior permission is a ground for disqualification. Statement 3 would NOT lead to disqualification. This is the 'merger' exception under the Tenth Schedule, where two-thirds of the members of a legislative party merge with another party. Statement 4 would NOT lead to disqualification. A nominated member is allowed to join a political party within six months of taking his seat in the House without attracting disqualification. Three months is within this permissible period.