INDIRA BANERJEE, J.

1. In this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, purported to be filed in public interest, the petitioner, a Member of the Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly elected from the Chepauk-Thiruvallikeni Assembly Constituency in Chennai from the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) party has, inter alia, sought orders on the respondents to remove the portrait of Selvi J.Jayalalithaa from the precincts of the Tamil Nadu Assembly.

2. A Press Release was issued by respondent no.3 and telecast through the visual media, announcing the decision taken by the Speaker of the Tamil Nadu Assembly on 10.02.2018 to unveil a portrait of Selvi J.Jayalalitha in the Tamil Nadu State Assembly Hall at 9.30 a.m. on Monday 12.02.2018 in the presence of the Chief Minister and the Deputy Chief Minister. The portrait was duly unveiled as scheduled, after which the petitioner filed this writ petition.

3. The petitioner has sought orders for removal of the portrait of Selvi J.Jayalalithaa, the former Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu, on the ground that she had been held guilty of corruption and possession of assets disproportionate to her known sources of income and convicted by a Special Court of offence inter alia under the Prevention of Corruption Act, by an order dated 27.09.2014 and sentenced inter alia to imprisonment of four years, apart from fine of Rs.100 crores.

4. Referring to a Notification No.223 of the Legislative Assembly Secretariat published in the Tamil Nadu Gazette dated Saturday, November 8, 2014, Mr.Wilson appearing for the petitioner argued that consequential to her conviction, Selvi.Jayalalithaa was disqualified under the Representation of People Act, 1951 read with Article 191(1)(e) of the Constitution, from being a Member of the Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly.

5. Mr.Wilson argued that it was morally wrong and against public interest to display portraits of convicts and more so, in the Hall of the Legislative Assembly where laws are enacted.

6. Mr.Wilson further argued that Selvi.Jayalalithaa having been disqualified as a member of the Legislative Assembly, her portrait ought not to be displayed in the Hall of the Legislative Assembly.

7. Mr.Wilson also questioned the legality and/or propriety of a Government Order (Standing) No.457 dated 04.06.2006 which permitted the display of portraits of the former Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu, notwithstanding her conviction for corruption under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1954.

8. As argued on behalf of the respondents, and admitted by the petitioner in his affidavit in support of the writ petition, the verdict of the Special Court was set aside by the High Court of Karnataka by a judgment and order dated 11.05.2017. Mr.Wilson, however argued that, on appeal by the State of Karnataka, the Hon'ble Supreme Court found all the accused including Selvi.Jayalalithaa guilty of corruption charges. It was, in view of Selvi Jayalalithaa's death that the appeals against her abated, and no sentence was imposed on her. Mrs.Sasikala, who had been co-accused, was convicted and sentenced inter alia to four years imprisonment with fine of Rs.100 crores and the properties belonging to her were ordered to be attached.

9. Mr.P.Wilson emphatically argued that Selvi.Jayalalithaa having been held guilty of corruption charges, her portrait should be removed from the Hall of the Assembly.

10. The questions raised by Mr.Wilson, on behalf of the writ petitioner are,

(i) Whether portraits of a person who was held guilty of moral turpitude should be displayed in the Hall of the Legislative Assembly, which is the edifice of democracy?

(ii) Whether a person found guilty of offences and subsequently disqualified from membership of the House can be glorified only because she has passed away?

(iii) Whether the decision of the Speaker to install a portrait of Ms.Jayalalitha in the Hall of the Legislative Assembly is merely an administrative decision beyond the purview of Constitution?

(iv) Wheth