O R D E R

1. Leave granted.

2. The President of the Bharatiya Janta Party (for short, `BJP’) of Arunachal Pradesh is aggrieved by the order dated 13.06.2024 passed by a Division Bench of the Gauhati High Court at Itanagar, whereby disqualification of respondent Nos.1-4 as members of the Zilla Parishad, Lower Subansiri District, has been stayed.

3. For the limited purpose of disposal of this appeal, it may be mentioned that respondent Nos.1-4 were elected in the year 2020 as Zilla Parishad members being candidates of the appellant’s party. After bifurcation of the aforesaid district into two parts, namely, Lower Subansiri and Keyi Panyor, respondent Nos.1-4 are said to have sent letters to the BJP District President stating that they are resigning from BJP and merging with the Nationalist Congress Party as they have 2/3rd majority in the newly carved out District of Keyi Panyor. It may be mentioned that the Lower Subansiri Zilla Parishad Signature Not Verified is yet to be bifurcated.

Digitally signed by satish kumar yadav Date: 2024.07.24

18:19:41 IST Reason:

4. This action of respondent Nos.1-4 led to issuance of show- cause notices to them by the appellant – party followed by a request to the State Election Commission to disqualify them from the Zilla Parishad. The Deputy Commissioner, Keyi Panyor and Lower Subansiri then issued show-cause notices to respondent Nos.1-4. In reply thereto, they asserted that they are withdrawing their resignations and rejoining the appellant political party. Be that as it may, Section 3 of the Arunachal Pradesh Local Authorities (Prohibition of Defection) Act, 2003 was invoked and respondent Nos.1-4 were disqualified by the Deputy Commissioner.

5. Respondents Nos.1-4 laid challenge to the order of their disqualification before the High Court but a learned Single Judge turned down their petition and upheld the disqualification vide the order dated 30.05.2024.

6. Still aggrieved, respondent Nos.1-4 have filed Writ Appeal No.17/2024 before the Division Bench of the High Court in which the impugned stay order has been passed. The operative part of the said order reads as follows:

“15) On a perusal of the herein before referred two letters dated 28.02.2024, submitted by the petitioners before the respondent nos. 1 and 3 the petitioners had clearly stated that they have merged to N.C.P. (Ajit Pawar) with more than 2/3rd majority and requested them to acknowledge their merger. Such a statement in the letter dated 28.02.2024 of the petitioners clearly demonstrate that they were aware of the legal provision as to when they may become liable to be disqualified. Thus, the step so taken by the petitioners was a calculated move, clearly depicting their intention to part way from the political party under whose aegis they had been elected in such a manner that they can be saved from disqualification.”

7. The principal grievance of the appellant’s party is that the Division Bench of the High Court while hearing an application for interim stay, has expressed its final opinion touching the merits of the case and, in a way, the intra-court appeal has been allowed by the said order.

8. Having heard learned Senior Counsel for the appellant and on perusing the material placed on record, we are satisfied that the impugned order dated 13.06.2024 is only an interim stay order and not a final opinion of the High Court. We hasten to clarify that the observations made therein are tentative and only a prima facie opinion for the purpose of deciding the prayer for interim stay. These observations need not be construed as the final opinion of the Division Bench of the High Court.

9. Having observed so, we are of the view that since the intra-court appeal is still pending before the High Court, it is not necessary for us to express any opinion on the merits of the controversy. At the same time, keeping the essence of time (as the elections were held in the year 2020) in view, it seems that the matter requires final adjudication by the