New Delhi, India – The Supreme Court has delivered a stern, final warning to the Telangana Assembly Speaker, mandating a decision on outstanding disqualification petitions against 10 Bharat Rashtra Samithi (BRS) Members of Legislative Assembly (MLAs) who defected to the Congress party. The supreme court declared that failure to adjudicate these pleas within three weeks would trigger contempt proceedings.
During a hearing on Friday concerning a contempt plea against the Speaker, a bench comprising Justices Sanjay Karol and A G Masih underscored the urgency of the matter. Justice Karol specifically advised senior advocate Abhishek Singhvi, representing the Speaker, to avoid trivializing the proceedings, remarking, “We request you not to make reels out of it. This is what is happening. Do not do it. What is happening is, it is a new industry.”
Singhvi informed the court that a decision had already been reached in one of the cases, and the Speaker was on the verge of ruling in two others. Citing the recent municipal elections in Telangana as a reason for the delay, he requested an additional three weeks to finalize all pending disqualification petitions.
However, counsel for the BRS MLAs countered, pointing out that the Speaker had previously sought extensions and had only convened a single meeting on the matter thus far. Justice Karol recalled that at the preceding hearing, the Speaker had requested three weeks, but the court had granted only two to observe progress.
The bench explicitly stated its expectation for the Speaker to take a “positive decision,” warning that non-compliance would lead to the court initiating contempt action. This latest directive follows a series of unheeded orders from the top court.
On January 16, the Supreme Court had instructed the Telangana Assembly Speaker to provide a status report within two weeks detailing the steps taken to adjudicate the disqualification pleas. Prior to that, on November 17, 2023, the court had issued a contempt notice to the Speaker for failing to comply with its earlier directives.
The contempt proceedings originated from a judgment issued on July 31 last year, which itself stemmed from a batch of writ petitions filed by BRS leaders K T Rama Rao, Padi Kaushik Reddy, and K O Vivekanand. In that July 31 order, the apex court had directed the Speaker to resolve the matter within three months.
The Supreme Court had previously condemned the non-compliance with its directions as the “grossest kind of contempt,” issuing notices to the Speaker and other relevant parties. Furthermore, it had also addressed a separate plea from the Speaker’s office seeking an eight-week extension to decide on the disqualification pleas.
The court reiterated a fundamental legal principle: when deciding on disqualification petitions under the Tenth Schedule of the Constitution – which pertains to defection – the Speaker acts as a tribunal and, consequently, does not possess “constitutional immunity” in this specific role.
