'Merger Construed Erroneously' : Goa Congress Chief Moves Supreme Court Against HC Upholding Speaker's Decision To Not Disqualify 10 MLAs Who Joined BJP

Goa Congress Chief Girish Chodankar has moved the Supreme Court of India challenging the Bombay High Court's order upholding order passed by the Speaker of Goa Legislative Assembly dismissing his petition seeking disqualification of 12 Goa MLAs who had defected to the BJP in 2019

The special leave petition has argued that the High Court has committed a grave error in upholding the order of the Speaker on the mistaken premise that since the remaining MLAs constituted 2/3rd of their legislature party and had decided to merge with another party, they would enjoy the protection granted under Para 4 of Schedule X of the Constitution by invoking the deeming fiction contained in Para 4(2).

"Interestingly, such claim of valid merger of the legislature party was upheld without a semblance of the merger of the original political party which is a necessary pre-requisite as is apparent from a plain reading of Para 4(1) of Schedule X." the petition states

The petitioner has submitted that the High Court has, given an erroneous interpretation by construing the merger of the original political party merely at the hands of 2/3rd of any legislature party, thereby, completely disrobing the original political party of any role with respect to its merger and resultantly leaving the original political party at the mercy of the legislature party.

According to the petitioner, this interpretation would render Para 4 of Schedule X of the Constitution unworkable and would stand at odds with the object of enactment of the Schedule.

The petition filed through Advocate Ujjawal Anand Sharma, has submitted that the High Court, has resultantly rendered an interpretation of Para 4(2) of Schedule X that is at variance with and wholly disjunctive with the purpose for which it was inserted, i.e., for giving effect to the agreement of "such merger" that has taken place outside the House, within the House.

The petitioner has also pointed the following ramifications of the application of the 'erroneous interpretation to Para 4(2) as given in the impugned judgment:

If Para 4(2) is completely distinct from Para 4(1), then every legislature party which is able to muster 2/3rd of its members can merge with any other party it may see fit, for extraneous reasons that are antithetical to the intent and purpose of Schedule X.

The more prominent original political party would be at the mercy of the whimsical musings of the majority members of a less conspicuous legislature party

The members of a legislature party set up the original political party would hold the fountainhead of their own authority at ransom as they would wield the sword of unilateral merger at their beck and call.

The political parties, without having contested elections, would be empowered to acquire 2/3rd members of the House of legislature parties  and, therefore, become a part of the House without having the mandate of the electorate that it is representing.

The SLP has been filed by Lawmen & White (L&W), through its Partner, Mr. Ujjawal Anand Sharma, Mr. Prashant Sivarajan and Mr. D. Kumanan (AOR).

Case Title: Girish Chodankar vs Speaker, Goa Legislative Assembly