1. I have had the privilege of going through the well written judgment authored by Hon’ble the Chief Justice. However, having some difference of opinion, I have separately penned down my judgment in the case.

The case:

Petitioners are Independent Members of the Legislative Assembly of the State of Himachal Pradesh. Their simple projected case is that ‘voluntary’ and ‘genuine’ resignations were tendered by them by hand on 22.03.2024 to the Speaker of the House. This was followed by written reminders requesting the Speaker to accept the same. The resignations so tendered were in conformity with the provisions of the Constitution of India and Rules of Procedure & Conduct of Business of the Legislative Assembly. The resignations are liable to be accepted, however, the Speaker in an illegal, unconstitutional and mala-fide manner, has refrained from taking decision on the resignations. Instead of accepting petitioners’ resignations, the Speaker has issued them show cause notice purportedly to ascertain voluntariness and genuineness of the resignations. Petitioners in their written responses to the show cause notice and also during interactions with the Speaker (recorded in the ongoing inquiry), have reiterated that their resignations were genuine and submitted voluntarily, however, the inquiry that is otherwise unnecessary and unwarranted in the given facts, is being conducted and dragged on. This action has caused prejudice to the constitutional rights of the petitioners, hence, the writ petition.

Respondent No. 1-the Speaker of the State Legislative Assembly, who is also impleaded by name as respondent No. 2, besides questioning maintainability of the writ petition against him at a pre-decisional stage, has defended its action of not taking the decision so far primarily on the grounds that:

(a) Constitution of India provides for accepting resignation only if the same was genuinely and voluntarily tendered and these two facets are to be ascertained in an inquiry to be conducted by him. The inquiry is in progress and decision can be taken only on its completion.

(b) The Constitution of India does not set out any time limit for taking decision on resignations.

2. There is no dispute amongst the parties to the following facts:

(i) The three petitioners contested the elections to the Himachal Pradesh Legislative Assembly as ‘Independent’ candidates in the year 2022. They were declared elected in the results announced on 08.12.2022. Petitioners No. 1 to 3 were elected from Constituencies of Dehra (10), Nalagarh (51) and Hamirpur (38), respectively, in the Legislative Assembly having total strength of 68 seats.

(ii) On 22.03.2024, petitioners submitted their separate resignation letters (Annexure P-1 Colly.) to respondent No. 1-the Speaker of the Legislative Assembly. The handwritten note on the top left hand column of the resignation letters suggests the tendering of the same ‘by hand’. Bottom note on the same side contains endorsement of receipt by respondent No. 3- the Secretary of the Legislative As