The Madras High Court today posted the case relating to the disqualification of 18 AIADMK legislators, owing allegiance to rebel leader T T V Dhinakaran, for final hearing on Thursday.
When the plea came up before Justice M Sathyanarayanan, senior counsel for the disqualified MLAs, P S Raman, submitted that when the governor refrained from action on the complaint made by the MLAs stating that the issue is an inter-party issue, it cannot attract disqualification.
Moreover, for action under Schedule 10 of the Constitution, important ingredients like a violation of the order issued by the whip, voluntary giving up of party membership and joining another political party are mandatory which are all absent in the present case, he submitted.
Honest dissent by members cannot be construed as voluntarily giving up party membership, in the present case the petitioners have not given any resignation or have joined another political party, particularly the DMK, which is a primary ground for disqualification, the senior counsel said.
The counsel said in all the disqualification cases upheld by the apex court, the members have joined another political party with contrasting political ideology of their mother party, he said.
Raman further alleged that the anti-defection law was being used against members who dissent against a leader supported by a group.
Recording the submission, Justice M Sathyanarayanan posted the plea to Thursday for final hearing.
Justice Sathyanarayanan is hearing the pleas after a bench of Chief Justice Indira Banerjee and Justice M Sundar gave a split verdict on the matter on June 14.
The 18 AIADMK MLAs were disqualified on September 18 last year under the anti-defection law after they met the Governor and expressed loss of confidence in Palaniswami.
In view of the split verdict with Chief Justice Indira Banerjee upholding the disqualification and Justice Sundar setting it aside, Justice S Vimala was appointed to hear the petitions afresh.
However, the apex court named Justice Sathyanarayanan while declining to accept a prayer of the disqualified MLAs who raised apprehension of "bias" and sought to transfer the matter to the apex court.
Disclaimer: No Business Standard Journalist was involved in creation of this content
You’ve reached your limit of {{free_limit}} free articles this month.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
Already subscribed? Log in
Subscribe to read the full story →
Smart Quarterly
₹900
3 Months
₹300/Month
Smart Essential
₹2,700
1 Year
₹225/Month
Super Saver
₹3,900
2 Years
₹162/Month
Renews automatically, cancel anytime
Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans
Exclusive premium stories online
Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors


Complimentary Access to The New York Times
News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic
Business Standard Epaper
Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share


Curated Newsletters
Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox
Market Analysis & Investment Insights
In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor


Archives
Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997
Ad-free Reading
Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements


Seamless Access Across All Devices
Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app
