Judgment :-

Altamas Kabir, CJI.

1. Leave granted.

2. These Appeals raise an interesting issue relating to the powers of the Speaker of the Orissa Legislative Assembly under Rule 6(1) and (2) of the Members of Orissa Legislative Assembly (Disqualification On Ground Of Defection) Rules, 1987, hereinafter referred to as "the 1987 Rules", in the wake of paragraphs 2(1)(a) and 8 of the Tenth Schedule to the Constitution of India and are taken up together for disposal. The facts giving rise to the said legal question are set out hereinbelow.

3. The Appellant herein is the Speaker of the Orissa Legislative Assembly. There were four elected members of the National Congress Party (NCP) in the Orissa Legislative Assembly. All the said four elected members of the NCP joined the Biju Janata Dal (BJD), which is the Ruling Party in the State of Orissa. On account of such defection, Respondent, Shri Utkal Keshari Parida, who is the President of the State Unit of the NCP in the State of Orissa, filed four separate Disqualification Petitions before the Appellant for disqualification of the said four elected members of the NCP. The Disqualification Petitions were placed before the Appellant on 24.07.2012 and copies thereof were forwarded to the concerned Members of the Legislative Assembly, in terms of Rule 7(3) of the 1987 Rules.

4. Inasmuch as, the matter was being delayed, the Respondent filed Writ Petition (C) No. 14869 of 2012, before the Orissa High Court, inter alia, for a direction to the Speaker of the Assembly to dispose of the Disqualification Petitions expeditiously. Before the Division Bench of the said High Court, an objection was taken regarding the maintainability of the Writ Petition at the instance of the Respondent, who though being the President of the State Unit of the NCP, was not a Member of the Legislative Assembly, in view of the provisions of Sub-rule (2) of Rule 6 of the 1987 Rules. Rule 6 of the 1987 Rules, which is relevant for our purpose, is extracted hereinbelow:

"6 (1) No reference of any question as to whether a Member has become subject to disqualification under the Tenth Schedule shall be made except by a petition in relation to such Member made in accordance with the provisions of this rule.

(2) A petition in relation to a Member may be made in writing to the Speaker by any other Member:

Provided that a petition in relation to the Speaker shall be addressed to the Secretary.

(3) The Secretary shall:-

(a) as soon as may be after the receipt of a petition under the proviso to sub-rule (2) make a report in respect thereof to the House ; and

(b) as soon as may be after the House has elected a Member in pursuance of the proviso to sub-paragraph (1) of paragraph 6 of the Tenth Schedule place the petition before such Member.

(4) Before making any petition in relation to any Member, the petitioner shall satisfy himself that there are reasonable grounds for believing that a question has arisen as to whether such Member has become subject to disqualification under the Tenth Schedule.

(5) Every petition:

(a) shall contain a concise statement of the material facts on which the petitioner relies; and

(b) shall be accompanied by copies of the documentary evidence, if any, on which the petitioner relies and where the petitioner relies on any information furnished to him by any person, a statement containing the names and addresses of such persons and the gist of such information as furnished by each such person.

(6) Every petition shall be signed by the petitioner and verified in the manner laid down in the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908), for the verification of pleadings.

(7) Every annexure to the petition shall also be signed by the petitioner and verified in the same manner as the petition."

5. Relying on the interpretation of the aforesaid Rule in the judgment delivered by this Court in Dr. Mahachandra Prasad Singh v. Chairman, Bihar Legislative Council and Others, [(2004) 8 SCC 747], the High Court came to the conclusion tha