Back
High Court of Judicature at Madras
R.K. AGRAWAL & M. SATHYANARAYANAN, JJ.
V.C. Chandhira Kumar, Member of Legislative Assembly & Others
Versus
Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly Secretariat Represented by Secretary & Another
Writ Appeal No. 1287 of 2013
Decided On : 21-10-2013
SUSPENSION OF MLAS - BREACH OF PRIVILEGE - PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE - POWER OF LEGISLATURE TO SUSPEND - PRIVILEGE BEYOND ASSEMBLY - SALARY AND ALLOWANCES - RAJYA SABHA ELECTION - [WRIT APPEAL DISMISSED].
Fact of the Case:
Appellants, MLAs of DMDK, were suspended for six months and their salary and allowances were withheld for allegedly assaulting another MLA inside the Assembly. They challenged the vires of the resolution passed in the Assembly.
Finding of the Court:
1. Principles of natural justice were not violated as appellants were given an opportunity to explain their conduct, video footage was shown to the Privilege Committee, and the report was placed before the Assembly for discussion and vote. 2. The State Legislature has the power and privilege under Article 194(3) of the Constitution to suspend a Member. 3. The suspension of a Member for more than 60 days is not ultra vires of Article 190(4) of the Constitution, as it was a consequence of the breach of privilege and not voluntary absence. 4. Denial of salary and other benefits during suspension is not ultra vires of Article 195 of the Constitution or the Tamil Nadu Payment of Salaries Act, 1951, as it is a consequence of the suspension. 5. The Legislative Assembly has no power to suspend the right of a Member to vote in the Rajya Sabha in the capacity as a Member of the Assembly.
Issues: 1. Whether the entire proceedings are vitiated and are liable to be set aside on the ground of violation of principles of natural justice? 2. Whether the State Legislature has the power and privilege under Article 194 to suspend the appellants? 3. If the answer is affirmative for question number (b) then, whether the appellants could be suspended for more than 60 days in the light of Article 190 (4) of the Constitution of India? 4. Whether the privilege is restricted to what happened inside the four walls of the Assembly and whether it can travel outside the Assembly? 5. Whether the Legislative Assembly has the power to suspend the salary and other benefits of a Member including their right to vote in the Rajya Sabha in the capacity of a Member of the Assembly?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The principles of natural justice are not absolute and their application depends on the facts and circumstances of each case. In this case, the appellants were given an opportunity to explain their conduct, video footage was shown to the Privilege Committee, and the report was placed before the Assembly for discussion and vote. Therefore, the principles of natural justice were not violated. 2. The power of expulsion is a necessary and incidental power to enable the House to perform its high functions and is necessary to the safety of the State. The power of suspension is a lesser punishment than expulsion and is therefore also available to the State Legislature. 3. Article 190(4) of the Constitution applies to cases where a Member voluntarily absents himself from the Assembly without permission. In this case, the appellants were suspended as a consequence of the breach of privilege and not voluntary absence. Therefore, Article 190(4) of the Constitution is not applicable. 4. The payment of salary and other benefits to a Member of the Legislative Assembly is a consequence of the office held. When a Member is suspended, he is debarred from discharging his duties and functions and therefore, the denial of salary and other benefits is a natural consequence of the suspension. 5. The Legislative Assembly has no power to suspend the right of a Member to vote in the Rajya Sabha in the capacity as a Member of the Assembly.
Final Decision: The writ appeal was dismissed confirming the order dated 5.6.2013, made in W.P.No.10175/2013, except the issue that de-hors the suspension of the appellants, they are entitled to participate in the voting for the election of Members to the Council of State (Rajya Sabha) as clarified by the Election Commission of India.
1. The petitioners in W.P.No.10175/2013, are the appellants and challenging the vires of the Resolution dated 26.3.2013, passed in the House of Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly, by and under which, they have been suspended for a period of six months and the salary and other allowances during that period, have been withheld, filed the above said writ petition and it was dismissed on 5.6.2013. The writ petitioners aggrieved by the said order, had filed this writ appeal.
2. BACKGROUND FACTS:
2.1. The facts leading to the filing of the writ petition have been narrated in detail, in the order passed in the writ petition, and therefore, it is not necessary to restate the entire facts except to briefly state certain facts, which are relevant for the purpose of disposal of this writ appeal.
2.2. The appellants/writ petitioners, who are six in number, belong to Desiya Murpokku Dravida Kazhagam (DMDK) and they are Members of the Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly from May, 2011, and represent the respective Constituency, from where, they got elected.
2.3. The first appellant is the Whip of the Party and the party, in which, he belongs, is declared as the "Opposition Party" in the Legislature and in the Assembly Election held during May, 2011, 29 members belonging to the said Party, were elected as Members of the Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly (MLAs), out of which, 4 without resigning from the Party, started behaving independently with an intention to cause split to the political party viz. DMDK. One such member viz. Thiru. Tamilalazhagan, got elected from the Thitakudi Constituency and 3 others viz. Thiru. Michael Rayappan, Thiru. R.Sundarajan and Thiru. Arunpandiyan, without getting permission from the Whip of the party viz. the first appellant herein, but with the permission of the Speaker, who according to the appellants herein, was carrying on colourable exercise of power, started making statements in support of the Ruling Party and also made threatening statements against the members of the DMDK Party and their activities caused disturbance and discomfort in the minds of the other Members of the said Party and they have also agitated.
2.4. On 8.3.2013, the provocation was passed by Mr.Tamilalazhagan and other MLAs viz. Tvl. Michael Rayappan, R.Sundarajan and Arunpandiyan, and they were ably supported by the MLAs belonging to the Ruling Party, and in this regard, the Speaker of the Legislative Assembly by invoking Rule 226 of the Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly Rules, had referred the matter alleging breach of privilege, to the Privilege Committee for the purpose of investigation and submission of report. The MLAs viz. The appellants herein, along with Tvl. Parthiban, Sekar and Muthukumar were also said to have been involved in the alleged breach of privilege.
2.5. According to the appellants, the Privilege Committee has conducted proceedings without issuing any notice to the appellants herein and in gross violation of principles of natural justice, fair play and good conscience, gave its report stating that the appellants are guilty of breach of privilege. As per the majority opinion of the Privilege Committee, it was recommended that the appellants, who had indulged in acts of assaulting a Member inside the house, have to be suspended for a period of one year and during that period, are also not eligible to receive salary and other allowances and the said report dated 21.3.2013, was placed before the Assembly and was put to vote and by majority, it was accepted.
2.6. The Hon'ble Speaker of the Assembly announced that as per the Resolution passed, the appellants have been suspended from the Assembly for a period of one year from that date and during that period, are ineligible to receive salary and other allowances. On 26.3.2013, the Leaders of the other Political Parties made a request for remission of the suspension period and the Hon'ble Chief Minister, taking into consideration the said plea, recommended that the period
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
