Speaker lacks power to take away status of ex-MLA while deciding disqualification plea: SC

The Speaker of a Legislative Assembly does not have the power to take away the status of former MLA while deciding a disqualification plea against a lawmaker under the 10th schedule of the Constitution, the Supreme Court ruled on Wednesday.

The order was passed on the appeal of the then four JD(U) MLAs – Gyanendra Kumar Singh, Rabindra Rai, Neeraj Kumar Singh and Rahul Kumar, who were not only disqualified but also ''disrobed'' of their status of being treated as former lawmakers, depriving them of pension and other benefits, on November 11, 2014 by Bihar Legislative Assembly Speaker Uday Narayan Chaudhary.

A bench headed by Chief Justice Uday Umesh Lalit restored the status of former MLAs to the four disqualified lawmakers, and consequently, they will be entitled to pension and other benefits.

It told senior advocate Devadutt Kamat and lawyer Smarhar Singh, appearing for the former MLAs, that since the 15th Legislative Assembly was no longer functioning, it would not go into the basic issue of whether the disqualification was unconstitutional.

The bench, also comprising justices S Ravindra Bhat and J B Pardiwala, however, accepted the contention that the speaker has no right under the 10th schedule of the Constitution to deprive an MLA of his entitlement to pension and related benefits, and the status of being a former lawmaker.

“In our considered view the Speaker was not within his jurisdiction to issue such directions... We therefore, set aside the directions of the Speaker in paragraph 28 of the order. With these observations the SLP is disposed of. Since, we have not gone into the question of disqualification all legal issues are left open,” the order said.

JD(U) Chief Whip Shravan Kumar had sought the disqualification of the four MLAs on June 21, 2014 alleging they pitched for party leaders Anil Sharma and Sarbar Ali as candidates for the Rajya Sabha polls to be held that year, while the party officially decided to field Sharad Yadav, Pawan Verma and Gulam Rasul. Heeding the request, the speaker disqualified them.

A single judge bench of the Patna High Court had granted them the relief of an interim stay which was later reversed by a division bench on the plea of the JD(U) chief whip. The four disqualified MLAs then appealed to the top court which had granted them interim relief. Disposing of the appeal which was filed in 2015, the top court said, the term of the assembly was from 2010 till November 20, 2015 and, moreover, the disqualified MLAs enjoyed the benefit of the interim stay order. The bench took note of the 2020 judgement passed in the case of S Balasahib Patil vs Speaker, Karnataka Legislative Assembly, and said the Speaker does not have the power to hold that a person will not be entitled to be treated as a former MLA.

“The judgement was clear that under the 10th schedule the speaker does not have power either to indicate the period for which the person would stand disqualified...,” Kamat argued.

The bench did not go into the disqualification aspect but set aside the part of the Speaker’s order which had held that the four will not be treated even as former MLAs.

(This story has not been edited by Devdiscourse staff and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)