Rajasthan Crisis : Live Updates From HC Hearing On Sachin Pilot Camp's Plea

Freedom of speech of a member is not an absolute freedom, the SC had held in Kihoto case, submits Singvhi.

The settled position cannot be reopened by the High Court, he says.

Singvhi says that the same arguments, which were considered and rejected by the SC, are being raised by Salve against the constitutionality of paragraph 2(1)(a) of the tenth schedule.

Singhvi points out that the SC, in the 1992 case Kihoto Hollohan case, had rejected the arguments raised by Salve against tenth schedule. Tenth Schedule was upheld as a reasonable restriction on free speech : Singvhi.

No cause of action for the writ until the Speaker takes a decision on the disqualification notices : Dr Singhvi.

Singhvi cites the 2016 Amrita Rawat vs Uttarakhand Legislative Assembly Speaker decision, where the court had dismissed a petition challenging show cause notice of Speaker.

Singhvi citing the decision in Keisham Meghachandra Singh(authored by J Nariman) to state that it is for the Speaker to decide on the disqualification notices.

The Courts cannot interfere before a decision is taken by the Speaker on the disqualification notices : Singhvi.

"Can speaker order that proceedings of the Court be video recorded?", Singhvi asks, saying that the Court should keep away from proceedings within House.

Courts cannot interfere with the house proceedings. The Speaker's decision to initiate disqualification proceedings are not amenable to judicial review : Dr AM Singhvi