SC Issues Notice On BSP's Challenging Rajasthan HC's Refusal To Stay Speaker's Approval Of Merger of 6 BSP MLAs With Congress

A Bench of Justices S. Abdul Nazeer and KM Joseph heard the matter and proceeded to issue notice. Senior Advocate Satish Chandra Mishra appeared on behalf of BSP.

The SLP was filed against the 24^th August, 2020, judgment of the Rajasthan High Court which had held that the 18^th September, 2019, order of the Speaker of the Rajasthan Legislative Assembly was an administrative order and not an order adjudicating the claim of merger -

"…without considering the substance of Order dated 18.09.2019 wherein the Speaker in unequivocal terms has given benefit of para 4(2) of the Tenth Schedule to recognize the claim of merger made by Respondent Nos. 3 to 8, dehors the adjudication on disqualification under para 6 of the Tenth Schedule".

Stating that the decision of the Speaker to approve the merger done in the most "arbitrary manner, without even issuing any notice or granting any opportunity of hearing to the Petitioner herein/BSP, which is the 'Original Political Party in terms of Para 4 of the Tenth Schedule and the affected party", the plea contends that the actions of the Speaker were "legally impermissible".

"Neither the Rules 1989 nor the provisions of Tenth Schedule empower the Speaker to decide the claim of merger. The findings recorded by the Speaker with respect to provisions of para 4 of the Tenth Schedule cause serious prejudice to the rights of the Petitioner as they were recorded without hearing the Petitioner who is the affected party and would come in the way in disqualification proceedings against Respondents Nos. 3 to 8".

The plea then goes on to state that the High Court has erred in holding the Order of the Speaker to be an administrative order and that the same has been done only on a "mere presumption/assumption without there being any such purpose evident from Order dated 19.09.2019".

It is also submitted that the High Court further erred in holding that the grant of an opportunity of hearing to the Petitioner would amount to an inquiry which was not warranted at the stage of recording the claim of merger, despite the fact that the findings of the Speaker in itself amounted to an inquiry.

In light of the above, the plea seeks for the setting aside of the Rajasthan High Court order dated 24^th August, 2020.

In September 2019, the Rajasthan Assembly Speaker, Dr. CP Joshi, had allowed merger of six BSP MLAs with Congress. These six MLAs had been elected to the Rajasthan Legislative Assembly in December 2018 on the ticket issued by BSP. An Application was submitted by them to the Speaker in September 2019, who allowed for the merger.

Challenging the Speaker's decision, BJP MLA Dilawar had moved the Rajasthan High Court in March 2020 under the Tenth Schedule of the Constitution of India, seeking for a stay of the same in order to restrict the six MLAs from attending proceedings in the House while was the matter was pending in Court. This plea was later withdrawn. After that the Speaker passed an order on 28th July dismissing Dilawar's petition to disqualify the BSP MLAs. This was further challenged by Dilawar before the Division Bench of the Rajasthan High Court.

Both the Single Bench and the Division Bench of the Rajasthan High Court refused to order interim stay of the Speaker's decision. A plea was then filed before the Supreme Court on behalf of Dilawar which was then dismissed on grounds that it was infructuous as the Rajasthan High Court had rendered a decision.

In the meanwhile, a Transfer Petition was filed by the six MLAs, seeking a transfer to the Supreme Court, the petition filed in Rajasthan HC challenging the Speaker's order approving the merger with Congress. During a previous hearing, Advocate Amit Pai had withdrawn the transfer petition.