Delhi High Court To Hear Tomorrow Pleas Challenging Suspension Of 7 BJP MLAs From Delhi Assembly Budget Session

The BJP MLAs had reportedly repeatedly interrupted Lt Governor VK Saxena during his address on February 15, which focused on highlighting the achievements of the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) government.

Seven BJP members, excluding Leader of Opposition Ramvir Singh Bidhuri, have been prohibited from participating in the House proceedings until disposal of case by committee of privilege.

The suspended members are Mohan Singh Bisht, Ajay Mahawar, OP Sharma, Abhay Verma, Anil Vajpayi, Jitender Mahajan, and Vijender Gupta.

The plea was mentioned today by Senior Advocate Jayant Mehta for urgent listing before a division bench of Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Manmeet P.S. Arora. The matter was thereafter listed before the bench of Justice Subramonium Prasad.

When the issue was brought before Justice Prasad, he initially proposed scheduling it for the following day. “If we have it tomorrow, we can do it much faster… I will be better prepared,” he remarked.

Subsequently, upon the senior counsel's request for the Court to issue a notice to the opposing party, the Court opted to briefly hear the matter before adjourning it.

Senior Counsel Mehta appearing on behalf of the petitioners cited Vijender Gupta V. Legislative Assembly Of The National Capital Territory Of Delhi Through Secretary & Anr. Ashish Shelar And Ors. Versus The Maharashtra Legislative Assembly & Anr.| W.P.(C) No. 797/2021 & Connected 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 91 whereby it was held that the suspension of the MLAs cannot be for an indefinite period. Further citing the cases, he submitted, "in terms of the rules, the maximum punishment that can be awarded should one be found guilty and assuming that the House was of the view that my conduct was disruptive, then the highest punishment that can be meted out is suspension for 3 days."

He pointed out that it was the third day of suspension of the 7 MLAs.

The senior counsel then read out the Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business in the Legislative Assembly before the Court, during which, justice Prasad remarked, “the question is, let's assume that a person is so disorderly, that in order to have a peaceful conduct of the remaining session, you are marshaled out, does it take away the right of the privilege committee to proceed further the matter to see whether a more stricter punishment is to be imposed or not?”

Senior Counsel Kirti Uppal, who was appearing virtually, responded by saying, “yes it does take away the right. Ashish Shelar resolves all the questions that the Lordship is asking.”

In the plea filed by the 7 MLAs, it has been alleged that other members of the Ruling party were also heckling and shouting inside the house; however, the Speaker “because of his biases and prejudices has not taken any action against the Deputy Speaker and members of the ruling party, though the said acts were of graver nature. But he ordered marshalling out the petitioner and other leaders of the Opposition party selectively at around 11:32 AM onwards.”

Notably, seven out of the eight BJP MLAs in the House, were marshaled out by the Speaker at different points of time.

The plea further mentions that on the next day of Budget Session (on 16.02.2024), during the proceedings of the Delhi Legislative Assembly, AAP MLA Dileep K Pandey, made a point of order at 11:13 AM, wherein he proposed the suspension of the 7 MLAs belonging to the opposition party from the House for an indefinite period.

“Relying on Rule 6 (page 126) 5th Schedule of the Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business in the Legislative Assembly of the NCT of Delhi, Dileep Pandey moved resolution against all the seven MLAs alleging that their previous acts are in violation of Code of Conduct for members of Delhi Legislative Assembly. He in the resolution stated that the matter be sent to Committee of Privileges and till the submission of findings of Committee of Privileges and the petitioner along with 6 other BJP MLA's be suspended,” the plea mentions.

The plea further mentions that the Speaker 'arbitrarily and capriciously' accepted the said resolution and put the motion before the House and on its acceptance by the voice vote, ordered the suspension of the 7 MLAs without any justification and again marshaled out the opposition party MLAs.

The Petitioners submitted that the impugned motion was 'manifestly unconstitutional and contrary to the Rules & Procedure and Conduct of Business of Legislative Assembly of Delhi.'

The Petitioners further submitted that the procedure adopted by the Speaker was an 'absolute violation of the Petitioners' rights guaranteed under the Constitution of India both as citizen of India and especially as members of the Legislative Assembly under Article 194 of the Constitution of india, hence, is ultra vires and non est in law.'

The Petitioners also submitted that the procedure adopted at the behest of the Legislative Assembly by the members of the ruling party (AAP) was 'maliciously designed in a manner calculative to exclude the Petitioners from, the House deliberations, with suspension till findings and report of the Privileges committee- which is an indefinite period.'

“The Respondents do not have any power and authority under the Rules & Procedure and Conduct of Business and Legislative Assembly of Delhi (20 19) to pass the impugned motion as done in the instant case,” the plea mentions.

According to the plea, during the session on February 15, 2024, the Lieutenant Governor of Delhi commenced addressing the house, highlighting the achievements and strategies of the Delhi government. However, at approximately 11:11 am, the Petitioners interjected with facts contradicting the claims made by the Lieutenant Governor. However, the Lieutenant Governor "persisted with his assertions".

Following a discussion at 11:18 am, Mahawar was escorted out of the assembly by order of the Speaker. Shortly after, at 11:20 am, Jitender Mahajan was also removed while addressing the conditions and aid for elderly people, women in distress, and widows.

The plea filed by MLAs Ajay Kumar Mahawar, Vijender Gupta, and Anil Kumar Bajpai, states, “the conduct of the Hon'ble Speaker herein has always been lenient and biased towards the ruling party which is clear from the fact that the current episode where only the members of opposite parties were marshalled out even though the members of the ruling party were continuously agitating and provoking the members of opposite party.”

“The Hon'ble Speaker has always shown a much lenient approach in dealing with the members of the ruling party when it comes to maintaining the decorum of the House. The specific acts done by the Hon'ble Speaker which showcases his allegiance shall be brought to the fore if so required,” it adds.

The petitioners have sought a direction, holding unconstitutional and setting aside the Impugned Motion passed by the Legislative Assembly of NCT of Delhi on 16.02.2024.

They have further sought a direction restraining and prohibiting theRespondents from interfering, in any manner, with the constitutional rights of the Petitioners including as the members of the Legislative Assembly.

The petitioner Om Prakash Sharma in his plea sought a direction setting aside of the decision of the Speaker to accept the resolution passed by the House dated 16.02.2024 and further referring the motion / resolution to Privileges Committee and further suspending the Petitioners on 16.02.2024 till the time the Privileges Committee submit its report.

The petitioner Abhay Verma in his plea sought a direction revoking the suspension of the Petitioner from attending the sittings of the House of Legislative Assembly of the NCT of Delhi with immediate effect to ensure fulfillment of the constitutional obligations of the Petitioner towards his constituency;

He also sought a direction, directing the Respondents to allow / permit him to attend the Legislative Assembly of the NCT of Delhi and exercise all his rights and privileges in the capacity as MLA.