Supreme Court Sets Deadline for Telangana Speaker on Defection Petitions
Apex court grants final opportunity to decide disqualification pleas of BRS MLAs.
The Supreme Court has given the Telangana Assembly Speaker three weeks to decide on the disqualification petitions against two Bharat Rashtra Samiti (BRS) legislators who defected to the Congress party. The bench, headed by Justice Sanjay Karol, warned that any further delay would be considered contempt of court. The court has been monitoring the delay in deciding these petitions, emphasizing that the Speaker's office cannot indefinitely postpone decisions on disqualification matters.
Senior advocate A.M. Singhvi, representing Telangana, requested the additional time. The court has consistently stressed the importance of timely decisions on disqualification petitions under the Tenth Schedule of the Constitution.
Key Facts
The Supreme Court gave the Telangana Assembly Speaker three weeks to decide on the disqualification petitions.
The petitions are against two Bharat Rashtra Samiti (BRS) legislators who defected to the Congress party.
The bench was headed by Justice Sanjay Karol.
The court warned that any further delay would be considered contempt of court.
UPSC Exam Angles
GS Paper 2: Polity and Governance - Anti-Defection Law, Role of Speaker, Judicial Review
Connects to syllabus topics on Parliament, State Legislature, Constitutional Amendments
Potential question types: Statement-based, analytical questions on the effectiveness of the Anti-Defection Law
Visual Insights
Delays in Defection Decisions: A Timeline
This timeline highlights key events related to delays in decisions on disqualification petitions by Speakers, culminating in the Supreme Court's intervention in the Telangana case.
Delays in deciding disqualification petitions have been a recurring issue, prompting the Supreme Court to intervene to ensure timely decisions and uphold democratic principles.
- 198552nd Amendment Act adds the Tenth Schedule (Anti-Defection Law) to the Constitution.
- 200391st Amendment Act strengthens the Anti-Defection Law by removing the split provision.
- 2020Supreme Court directs the Manipur Assembly Speaker to decide on pending disqualification petitions within a specific timeframe.
- 2022Maharashtra political crisis highlights the issue of defection and the role of the Speaker.
- 2024Supreme Court intervenes in the Telangana case, setting a deadline for the Speaker to decide on disqualification petitions.
- 2026Supreme Court sets a three-week deadline for the Telangana Assembly Speaker to decide on defection petitions.
More Information
Background
Latest Developments
Frequently Asked Questions
1. What is the Tenth Schedule of the Constitution, and why is it relevant to this news?
The Tenth Schedule, also known as the Anti-Defection Law, aims to prevent legislators from switching parties after being elected. This news is relevant because the Supreme Court is addressing disqualification petitions under this schedule, concerning legislators who defected from the BRS party to the Congress party.
2. What are the key facts the UPSC might ask about this Supreme Court case?
Key facts for Prelims include: The Supreme Court has given the Telangana Assembly Speaker three weeks to decide on disqualification petitions. The petitions concern two BRS legislators who defected to Congress. The bench was headed by Justice Sanjay Karol. The court warned of contempt if the deadline isn't met.
3. Explain the role of the Speaker in matters of defection under the Tenth Schedule.
The Speaker of the Assembly decides on disqualification petitions filed under the Tenth Schedule. The Supreme Court is monitoring the delay in the Telangana Speaker's decision, highlighting concerns about the timely resolution of defection matters. There are suggestions for an independent tribunal to decide on disqualification matters to ensure impartiality.
4. Why is the Supreme Court involved in setting a deadline for the Telangana Speaker?
The Supreme Court is involved because of concerns about delays in deciding disqualification petitions. The court emphasizes the importance of timely decisions on defection matters to uphold the integrity of the democratic process. Undue delays can undermine the purpose of the Tenth Schedule.
5. What is the potential impact of this Supreme Court ruling on the political landscape in Telangana?
The ruling could lead to the disqualification of the two BRS legislators, potentially affecting the current composition of the Telangana Assembly. More broadly, it reinforces the importance of adhering to the Anti-Defection Law and could deter future defections.
6. What are the arguments for and against giving the Speaker the power to decide on disqualification petitions?
Arguments for: The Speaker is familiar with the Assembly's workings and political dynamics. Arguments against: Potential for bias, as the Speaker is a member of the ruling party. This can lead to delays or decisions influenced by political considerations, as seen in this case.
7. What are the important dates related to this case that are relevant for the UPSC exam?
Key dates include: February 7, 2026, when the Supreme Court set the deadline for the Speaker. July 2025, when the court initially gave the Speaker three months to decide. These dates highlight the timeline of judicial intervention.
8. What reforms could be implemented to strengthen the Anti-Defection Law?
Reforms could include: Establishing an independent tribunal to decide on disqualification matters instead of the Speaker. Clearly defining what constitutes defection to prevent loopholes. Setting strict timelines for decisions on disqualification petitions.
9. What is the significance of the numbers '2' and '3' in the context of this news?
The number '2' refers to the two BRS legislators facing disqualification petitions. The number '3' refers to the three weeks the Supreme Court gave the Telangana Assembly Speaker to decide on the petitions.
10. How does this news relate to the separation of powers between the judiciary and the legislature?
The Supreme Court's intervention highlights the judiciary's role in ensuring that the legislature (represented by the Speaker) adheres to constitutional principles, specifically the Tenth Schedule. It showcases judicial review over the Speaker's actions to prevent delays in justice.
Practice Questions (MCQs)
1. Consider the following statements regarding the Tenth Schedule of the Indian Constitution: 1. It was inserted by the 52nd Constitutional Amendment Act of 1985. 2. It deals with the disqualification of Members of Parliament and State Legislatures on the ground of defection. 3. The decision of the Speaker/Chairman in this regard is final and not subject to judicial review. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
- A.1 and 2 only
- B.2 and 3 only
- C.1 and 3 only
- D.1, 2 and 3
Show Answer
Answer: A
Statement 1 is CORRECT: The Tenth Schedule, also known as the Anti-Defection Law, was indeed inserted into the Constitution by the 52nd Constitutional Amendment Act of 1985. Statement 2 is CORRECT: The Tenth Schedule deals with the disqualification of Members of Parliament and State Legislatures on the ground of defection. Statement 3 is INCORRECT: The decision of the Speaker/Chairman is subject to judicial review, as established in Kihoto Hollohan vs. Zachillhu and Others case (1992). The Supreme Court held that while the Speaker is the initial authority, their decision is not immune from judicial scrutiny.
2. In the context of the recent Supreme Court directive to the Telangana Assembly Speaker, which of the following statements is most accurate regarding the Speaker's role in disqualification proceedings under the Tenth Schedule?
- A.The Speaker's decision is final and cannot be challenged in any court of law.
- B.The Speaker's decision is subject to judicial review, but only after the completion of their full term.
- C.The Speaker's decision is subject to judicial review, and undue delay in deciding disqualification petitions can be a ground for intervention.
- D.The Speaker has no role in disqualification proceedings; it is solely the Election Commission's responsibility.
Show Answer
Answer: C
Option C is the most accurate. While the Speaker is the initial authority in deciding disqualification petitions under the Tenth Schedule, their decisions are subject to judicial review. The Supreme Court has repeatedly emphasized that undue delay in deciding these petitions can be a ground for judicial intervention to ensure timely justice and uphold the integrity of the democratic process. The Kihoto Hollohan case clarified this aspect.
3. Which of the following conditions, if met, would NOT lead to the disqualification of a Member of Parliament (MP) under the Tenth Schedule (Anti-Defection Law)?
- A.Voluntarily giving up membership of their political party.
- B.Voting in the House contrary to the directions issued by their political party without prior permission.
- C.A member elected as an independent candidate joining a political party after such election.
- D.Mergers of political parties where two-thirds of the members of the party have agreed to such merger.
Show Answer
Answer: D
Option D is correct. Disqualification on the ground of defection does not apply in cases of mergers of political parties where at least two-thirds of the members of the party have agreed to such a merger. This is an exception provided in the Tenth Schedule to protect genuine party realignments. The other options (A, B, and C) are all grounds for disqualification under the Anti-Defection Law.
Source Articles
Supreme Court gives Telangana Speaker more time to decide anti-defection pleas against BRS MLAs who shifted allegiance - The Hindu
Supreme Court considers question of timeline for Speakers to decide on defections - The Hindu
Announce schedule of hearing petition seeking disqualification of three MLAs within four weeks: Telangana HC directs Assembly speaker - The Hindu
Speaker must decide disqualification petitions within ‘reasonable time’, says Telangana High Court - The Hindu
All eyes on Speaker’s decision on disqualification petitions against Nagender and Kadiyam Srihari - The Hindu