Chennai, June 18:
The Madras High Court on Wednesday ordered issuance of notices to the concerned parties and adjourned to June 29, the petition filed by Opposition AIADMK against Tamil Nadu Assembly Speaker JCD Prabhakar accepting the resignation of four Rebel AIADMK legislators, who joined joining the ruling Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK) of Chief Minister Vijay, when disqualification proceedings were pending against them for voting in favour of the government in the trust vote in violation of the whip.
When the petition filed by AIADMK Whip and former Minister S S Agri Krishnamurthy was taken up for hearing, the First Bench, comprising Chief Justice SA Dharmadhikari and Justice G Arul Murugan.
while refusing to restrain the Election Commission from holding bye-elections to the four seats, ordered notices to to the Speaker and Secretary of the Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly, the Election Commission of India, the Chief Electoral Officer and the four former MLAs.
Mr Krishnamurthi filed a petition on Monday seeking to quash the Speaker’s acceptance of the four MLAs’ resignations.
Challenging Prabhakar’s ruling, he contended that it amounted to circumventing the Anti-Defection Statute – Tenth Schedule of the Constitution and also prayed for restraining the Election Commission from issuing the notification to hold by-elections for these four seats.
Fuelling allegations of horse-trading, Maragatham Kumaravel (Madurantakam-SC constituency), S Jayakumar (Perundurai), P Sathyabama (Dharapuram-SC) and Esakki Subbaiya (Ambasamudram) resigned as MLAs and switched over to the TVK. During the Trust vote on May 13, 25 MLAs, including the quartet, voted for the Government.
During the hearing, Senior Counsel V Giri, appearing for the AIADMK, argued that the MLAs submitted their resignations on May 25 and that the resignations were accepted the same day, followed by the issuance of a Gazette notification. He further submitted that the legislators were admitted into the TVK on the same day, which, according to him, indicated possible horse-trading.
“There was an intention to give membership in the opposing party, which was manifested. This is what we call horse-trading. Resignation comes with the promise of many other things,” Giri submitted.
He further argued that if the Speaker had conducted a proper enquiry, notice ought to have been issued to the AIADMK to enable the party to place its objections on record.
Advocate General Vijay Narayan, appearing for the State, contended that the Speaker’s role was limited to examining whether the resignation letter had been submitted voluntarily and whether it was genuine.
After hearing the submissions of both sides, the Bench adjourned the matter to June 29.