1 week ago
Madras High Court Upholds Speaker’s Ruling on 21 AIADMK MLAs
The case involved 21 AIADMK lawmakers who were accused of breaking a party voting instruction.
They had voted in favour of the Tamilaga Vetri Kazhagam government.
An advocate asked the court to keep the disqualification case alive.
The Madras High Court disagreed with him.
The judges said AIADMK had forgiven or accepted what the lawmakers did.
Because of that, the court said the lawmakers could not be disqualified under the Tenth Schedule.
The court also said the advocate was not connected to the party’s affairs.
It therefore upheld the Speaker’s ruling.
The Madras High Court upheld Speaker J.C.D. Prabhakar’s ruling concerning disqualification proceedings against 21 AIADMK MLAs.
The MLAs were accused of violating an AIADMK whip by voting in favour of the Tamilaga Vetri Kazhagam government.
The court said AIADMK had condoned the MLAs’ actions and that they continued to represent the party.
The judges ruled that disqualification under the Tenth Schedule would therefore not apply.
The court dismissed advocate P.V. Selvakumar’s petition, saying he lacked standing to intervene in the party’s internal affairs.
- Who
- The Madras High Court, Speaker J.C.D. Prabhakar, 21 AIADMK MLAs, AIADMK general secretary Edappadi K. Palaniswami, and petitioner P.V. Selvakumar.
- What
- The court upheld the Speaker’s ruling that disqualification proceedings against the 21 MLAs would not apply.
- Where
- Madras High Court, Chennai.
- When
- Not specified in the report.
- Why
- The court said AIADMK had condoned the MLAs’ actions and that the petitioner lacked standing to interfere in the party’s internal affairs.
Petitioner’s View
Court’s View
Whether disqualification proceedings should continue
Petitioner’s View
P.V. Selvakumar argued that the disqualification petition should remain alive even after AIADMK general secretary Edappadi K. Palaniswami sent the Speaker a letter condoning the MLAs’ actions.
Court’s View
The court ruled that AIADMK had condoned the MLAs’ actions, so disqualification under the Tenth Schedule would not apply.
Petitioner’s right to challenge the matter
Petitioner’s View
The petitioner sought judicial intervention in the disqualification issue.
Court’s View
The judges said he was a third party unconnected with AIADMK affairs and lacked locus standi to interfere in the party’s internal affairs.
Key facts
- Court
- Madras High Court
- Bench
- Chief Justice Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari and Justice G. Arul Murugan
- Speaker
- J.C.D. Prabhakar
- MLAs involved
- 21 AIADMK MLAs
- Alleged violation
- Voting against an AIADMK whip in favour of the Tamilaga Vetri Kazhagam government
- Legal provision
- Tenth Schedule
- Petitioner
- Advocate P.V. Selvakumar
Sources
Related news
Ex-AIADMK MLA Seeks Withdrawal of Resignation From Speaker
Telangana High Court Begins Hearing BRS MLAs' Disqualification Pleas
Telangana High Court Reviews Challenge to Speaker’s Disqualification Ruling
Madras High Court sets August 27 deadline in election cases
Telangana High Court Reserves Verdict on Nagender Disqualification Petitions
EPS Highlights AIADMK Role in Tamil Nadu Reservation Protection
Vijay Deploys Ministers Against Opposition in Tamil Nadu Assembly
Palaniswami Accuses Tamil Nadu Government of Wasting Assembly Time
Iran War and Fuel Costs Drive Tamil Nadu Price Hike
Tamil Nadu Assembly Presses Government Over Nepal-Stranded Tamils
