2011 Supreme(SC) 537

2011 (4) Supreme 162
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Altamas Kabir and Cyriac Joseph, JJ.
Balchandra L. Jarkiholi & Ors. — Appellants
versus
B.S. Yeddyurappa & Ors. — Respondents
Civil Appeal Nos.4444-4476 of 2011
(Arising out of SLP(C)Nos.33123-33155 of 2010)
with C.A.Nos...4522-4554/2011 @ SLP(C)Nos. 33185-33217 of 2010 and C.A.Nos...4477-4509/2011 @ SLP(C)Nos.33533-33565 of 2010
Decided on : 13-5-2011

IMPORTANT POINT
Actions/decision of Speaker in disqualification cases is amenable to judicial review.

Headnote:(a) Constitution of India – Tenth Schedule – paragraph 2(1)(a) – ‘Constitutional process’ used in the letters of the MLAs – The expression did not necessarily mean the constitutional process of proclamation of President’s rule – It could also mean the process of removal of the Chief Minister through constitutional means – Thus the ruling Party was not necessarily deprived of a further opportunity of forming a Government after a change in the leadership of the legislature party. (Para 76)

        (1992) Supp.2 SCC 651; (1996) 2 SCC 353; (2000) 5 SCC 88; (2001) 7 SCC 231; 63 Indian Appeals 372; (1964) 4 SCR 485 – Relied upon impliedly

        (2007) 4 SCC 270 – Referred

        (b) Constitution of India – Tenth Schedule – paragraph 2(1)(a) – Allegation made by a third party not involved in the dispute – The third party not asked to substantiate the allegations – Appellants not given opportunity – By merely not denying the allegations it cannot be taken that the same was proved. (Para 77)

        (c) Karnataka Legislative Assembly (Disqualification of Members on Ground of Defection) Rules, 1986 – Rule 7(3) – Despite there being no compulsion on the part of the Speaker to decide the case of disqualification before the date of voting fixed by the Governor, only three days time given instead of 7 days as required by rule 7(3) – Speaker apparently acted in hot haste. (Para 77)

        (2004) 8 SCC 747; (1994) Suppl. (2) SCC 641 – Distinguished

        (d) Karnataka Legislative Assembly (Disqualification of Members on Ground of Defection) Rules, 1986 – Rule 6(1) – Governor receiving letters withdrawing support to Chief Minister and forwarding the same to the Chief Minister and the Speaker the same day – Chief Minister filing application before the Speaker for disqualification of concerned MLAs the same day – Speaker asking the very next day the MLAs to show cause within three days so as to decide the matter before the voting day on confidence motion – Such a great hurry apparently not bona fide. (Paras 86, 87)

        (1964) 4 SCR 733 – Relied upon impliedly

        (e) Constitution of India – Tenth Schedule – Paragraph 2(1)(a) – Appellants served with copy of newspaper report about affidavit of a third party making allegations against them – Copy of the affidavit not served on the appellants – They also not given opportunity to cross examine the deponent – Appellants prejudiced by denial of natural justice. (Para 87)

        (2006) 11 SCC 1 – Referred

        (1985) 3 SCC 398 – Relied upon impliedly

        (f) Constitution of India – Tenth Schedule – Paragraph 2(1)(a) – Disqualification application making only bald assertions – Not supported by any direct evidence – Affidavit by a third party, not connected with the matter, and the two MLAs withdrawing their applications merely a cover-up – Time given for filing show cause was so short as to make it impossible to make any effective show cause – Conduct of the proceedings not proper and vitiated. (Para 88)

        (g) Constitution of India – Tenth Schedule – Paragraph 2(1)(a) – Speaker holding that all MLAs filing applications before Governor stood disqualified immediately – Yet allowing two of them to retract the same – Not bona fide. (Para 89)

        (2005) 11 SCC 314; (1974) 4 SCC 3 – Referred

        (h) Constitution of India – Tenth Schedule – Paragraph 2(1)(a) r/w paragraph 6 – While deciding disqualification of members the Speaker discharges quasi judicial function – Well settled that such functions/decisions are amenable to judicial review under Articles 32, 226 and 227. (Para 90)

        (1998) 7 SCC 517 – Relied upon impliedly

        (i) Karnataka Legislative Assembly (Disqualification of Members on Ground of Defection) Rules, 1986 – Rule 6(1) – Even if the Rules were only directory in nature, even then sufficient opportunity should have been given to the Appellants to meet the allegations levelled against them. (Para 92)

       Facts of the case:

        All these appeals arise out of the order dated 10th October, 2010, passed by the Speaker of the Karnataka State Legislative Assembly on Disqualification Application filed by Shri B.S. Yeddyurappa, the Legislature Party Leader of the Bharatiya Janata Party in Karnataka Legislative Assembly, who is also the Chief Minister of the State of Karnataka, on 6th October, 2010, against Shri M.P. Renukacharya and 12 others, claiming that the said respondents, who were all Members of the Karnataka Legislative Assembly, would have to be disqualified from the membership of the House.

       Finding of the Court:

        Speaker did not act in a bona fide manner.

       Result : Appeals allowed.