SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Jhk) 1154

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI, J.
Anosh Ekka S/o Shri Anand Kumar Ekka – Petitioner
Versus
Alamgir Alam – Respondent
W.P. (C) No. 4123 of 2009
Decided On : 06-09-2023

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioners: Rajendra Krishna, Amit Sinha, Pratiyush Shounikya, Shubham Mayank.
For the Respondents: Anil Kumar, Ankitesh Kumar Jha, Aparna Dubey.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - 10th Schedule - Disqualification of a member due to violation of party 'Whip' - The petitioner was disqualified by the Speaker for not following the 'Whip' issued by the party and supporting another coalition - The court affirmed the Speaker's order based on unrefuted findings and adequate opportunity for hearing - Judicial review limited to constitutional compliance, mala fides, and natural justice - Speaker's order found to be non-perverse. (Para 1, 2, 5, 22, 23)

(B) Disqualification - Nature and process of disqualification proceedings under the 10th Schedule - The proceedings are deemed to be quasi-judicial, allowing for judicial review but restricted to specific parameters. (Paras 20, 21).

(C) Anti-defection law - Intended to curb political defections and bolster the democratic fabric, reinforcing accountability among elected representatives. (Para 16)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner contested elections as a member of the Jharkhand party and was disqualified for disregarding the party 'Whip' issued on 01.03.2005 - Following a series of internal party decisions and accusations of manipulation, the Speaker imposed disqualification on 13.08.2009.

Findings of Court:
The court found no merit in the petitioner's claims regarding procedural violations or the legitimacy of the Speaker's decision, confirming its legality based on clear evidence of the petitioner's actions against party directives.

Issues: The main issues were the validity of the complaint regarding the 'Whip,' the process of disqualification under the 10th Schedule of the Constitution, and adherence to principles of natural justice during the proceedings.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that disqualification under the 10th Schedule is operative upon the act of defiance of a party 'Whip,' and the proceedings before the Speaker complied with necessary legal standards, thus rendering the disqualification valid.

Result: Petition dismissed.

Table of Content
1. disqualification under the 10th schedule. (Para 2 , 3 , 4)
2. validity of the enforcement of the party whip. (Para 5 , 6 , 10)
3. judicial review standards for speaker's decisions. (Para 7 , 8 , 12)
4. nature of speaker’s powers under the 10th schedule. (Para 9 , 11)
5. conclusion on the constitutionality of disqualification. (Para 15 , 19 , 24)

JUDGMENT :

SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI, J.

1. Heard Mr. Rajendra Krishna, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Anil Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 2. The argument was concluded on 25.08.2023 and the judgment was reserved on that day.

2. This petition has been filed against the order dated 13.08.2009, contained in Annexure-3, issued by the respondent No. 1, who was the Speaker, Jharkhand Legislative Assembly, while exercising powers under 10th Schedule of the Constitution of India and Clause-2 of the same, in particular for allegedly violating the ‘Whip’ issued by the then President of Jharkhand Party directing the petitioner to support the United Progressive Alliance (hereinafter referred to as ‘U.P.A.’) Government headed by Shri Shibu Soren in the vote of confidence in the Jharkhand Assembly and to cast vote in favour of U.P.A. candidates for the post of Chief Minister, whereby, he has been pleased to disqualify the petitioner being a Member of Jharkhand Legislative Assembly and has ceased to be the Member of the same with effect from the date of the impugned order dated 13.08.2009.

3. Mr. Rajendra Krishna, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner had contested election for Membership of the Legislative Assembly from Kolebira Assembly Constituency as a candidate from the Jharkhand Party and was declared elected vide order of the Returning Officer dated 27.02.2005. He submitted that on 01.03.2005, Sri N.E. Horo issued ‘Whip’ directing the petitioner to support U.P.A. Government. On 02.03.2005, Shri N.E. Horo withdrawn letter dated 01.03.2005, issuing ‘Whip’ directing the petitioner to support U.P.A. and on the even date, another letter had been issued by Shri N.E. Horo stating that the earlier letter dated 02.03.2005 was obtained under duress. He further submitted that on 05.03.2005, the Party resolved for suspending Shri Lal Ran Vijay Nath Shahdeo and two others Members of the party for six years. He further submitted that the act of Shri N.E. Horo was condemned in the meeting of the Central Working Committee and the District Committee Members on 06.03.2005 and Shri N.E. Horo was suspended from the party on 07.03.2005. He further submitted that Shri Ashok Kumar Bhagat, Central General Secretary, informed the Chief Election Commissioner about the suspension of Shri N.E. Horo on 09.03.2005. He submitted that Shri Lal Ran Vijay Nath Shahdeo on 09.03.2005 after selected as New Party President, issued ‘Whip’ to the petitioner to support the National Democratic Alliance (hereinafter referred to as N.D.A.). On 09.03.2005 itself, N.E. Horo wrote a letter to the Protem Speaker praying that action be taken against the petitioner (Anosh Ekka) as per the 10th Schedule of the Constitution of India for not following the party resolution dated 01.03.2005. He further submitted that the petitioner took oath on 10.03.2005 as a Member of Legislative Assembly and consequently made a Cabinet Minister. The petitioner on 15.03.2005, casted his vote on the floor of the House in support of the N.D.A. He further submitted that in a biennial conference, held on 29.03.2005 of the Jharkhand Party, attended 730 active members, 21 office bearers selected the petitioner-Anosh Ekka as the President. He also submitted that on 31.03.2005/01.04.2005, biennial conference held by Shri N.E. Horo resolving himself to be the President of the Party along with 29 other members. He further submitted that the petitioner has moved before this Court with a prayer for taking a decision on his candidature and by order dated 20.05.2005, the High Court reque

    Click Here to Read the rest of this document
    1
    2
    3
    4
    5
    6
    7
    8
    9
    10
    11
    SupremeToday Portrait Ad
    supreme today icon
    logo-black

    An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

    Please visit our Training & Support
    Center or Contact Us for assistance

    qr

    Scan Me!

    India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

    For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

    whatsapp-icon Back to top