PRABHA SHANKER MISHRA, C. J.

( 1 ) PETITIONER-KARANAM Balarama Krishna Murthy, a resident of Ongole in Prakasam Districthas moved this Court for a writ in the nature of quo-warranto in W. P. NO. 28615/95 and W. P. No. 28622/95 on the ground that the 1st respondent-Gottipati Hanumanta Rao has incurred disqualification under the Tenth Schedule of the Constitution of India to be a Member of Andhra Pradesh Legislative Assembly as well as on the ground that his antecedents and blemished record of crime and violence are such that he is unfit to discharge his constitutional duties as a Member of the Legislative Assembly and a Minister in the Cabinet of Sri Chandrababu Naidu, the Chief Minister of the State. He has invoked this Court s jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution for, according to him, although Sri Hanumantha Rao joining Telugu Desam Party after his having been elected as an independent candidate during 1994 elections, Speaker of the Assembly has not taken any proceedings and declared him disqualified under a rule framed by him i. e. , the Speaker in exercise of the Powers in paragraph 8 of the Tenth Schedule of the Constitution. Since only a Member of the Legislative Assembly is competent to file a petition in relation to the disqualification of another Member of the House, he (the petitioner) is not permitted to seek a reference about the disqualification of Sri Rao to him (the Speaker ). Question whether the alleged criminal track record of Sri hanumantha Rao disentitles him to hold the office of a Member of Legislative Assembly as well as a Minister in the Government of the State cannot, according to the petitioner, be agitated either before the Speaker as contemplated under the Tenth Schedule of the Constitution or under Articles 191 and 192 of the Constitution of India before the Governor of the State. According to him (the petitioner) a writ in the nature of quo-warranto or any other form to unseat Sri Rao (the 1st respondent) can be issued only by the Court exercising its plenary power and his moving the Court is not an act of an adversary in politics or in life to Sri Rao (the 1st Respondent) but that of a conscientious citizen and a voter in the Constituency represented by Sri Rao which has suffered by his election as a Member of the Assembly and his nomination by the Chief Minister after he has defected to the party headed by him as Minister in his Cabinet. Article 191 of the Constitution has received a substantial amendment by the Constitution (Fifty-second Amendment) Act, 1985 in the shape of clause (2) thereof and the Tenth Schedule containing provision as to disqualification on ground of defect. The two parts of Article 191 speak of disqualification of a Member of the Legislative Assembly or the Legislative Council of a State. Clause (1) states,"a person shall be disqualified for being chosen as, and for being, a member of the Legislative Assembly or Legislative Council of a State (a) If he holds any office of profit under the Government of India or the Government of any states specified in the First Schedule, other than an office declared by the Legislature of the State by law not disqualify its holders; (b) If he is of unsound mind and stands so declared by a competent court; (c) If he is an undischarged insolvent; (d) If he is not a citizen of India, or has voluntarily acquired the citizenship of a foreign state, or is under any acknowledgment of allegiance or adherence to a foreign State; (e) If he is so disqualified by or under any law made by Parliament". Explanation appended to the said clause states,"for the purposes of these clauses, a person shall not be deemed to hold an office of profit under the Government of India or the Government of any State specified in the First Schedule by reason only that he is a Minister either for the Union or for such State"article 192 envisages that,"if any question as to whether a Member of a House of the Legislature of a State has become subject to any o

Click Here to Read the rest of this document