New Delhi: In an important judgment, the Supreme Court on Thursday asked to protect the foundation of democracy, Parliament should take a call on the effectiveness of the anti-domestic law system, which is almost convicted due to the widely alleged bias of the speakers, delaying the disqualification of disqualified petitions against political turns.Chief Justice BR Gavai and Justice AG Masih directed the Telangana assembly speaker, deciding that within three months, to decide that the disqualification petitions filed against 10 BRS MLAs who blamed the Congress after formation in the state after the November 2023 elections. The judgment has a departure from restraint that the courts have shown to set a time limit for speakers and may be well an example in disposing of cases related to defects in the future.The CJI-LED bench also instructed the speaker not to allow 10 MLAs, which is facing disqualification proceedings, enhancing the proceedings. “Any such MLA tried to extend the proceedings, the speaker would adversely assess against him,” the bench said.President of Telangana violated Parliament Trust: SC Constitutional courts have generally avoided tied to speakers with a timeline to decide pending disqualification petitions. However, SC said that since the Telangana speaker has delayed the completion of disqualification petitions for more than a year, it issued a direction to them.The bench was important in the way that the speaker issued a notice on disqualification petitions seven months after being filed, and said that such a delay had repeated the Trust Parliament among the presiding officers, which had defused cases of fearlessly and rapid misconduct. In the 2023 elections for the 119 -member assembly, the Congress won 64 seats, BRS 39, BJP eight, AIMM Seven and CPI One. However, the number of Congress increased after the defection of 10 BRS MLAs.CJI Gavai said that implementing the 74-Page decision, intentionally recording several examples of passive inaction of speakers in a quick adjournment of disqualification petitions against the MLA, CJI Gavai said, “It is an important task for Parliament to consider whether the system of handing over the speakers is an important task of deciding the issue of disgrace on the basis of the system.” “If the very foundation of our democracy and the principles that maintain it, then it has to be investigated whether the current mechanism is sufficient or not... This is for Parliament to take a call on it, “CJI said.The SC reiterated the settled law that the speakers/presidents of the meetings, Lok Sabha or Rajya Sabha Celebrations as a tribunal as a tribunal, can be investigated by the HCS and Apex Court, determining the disqualification petitions under the anti-action law. CJI Gavai investigated the objective behind the enactment of the opposing-dominated law through a constitutional amendment in 1985 and said that the sole purpose to hand over the work of postponing disqualification petitions to the Chairman/Chairman was to avoid delay in courts in law or Election Commission.“Due to the important question of postponing disqualification petitions, the speaker/chairman hoped to decide them fearlessly and faster,” he said, “he said the important question of postponing disqualification petitions. CJI Gawai and Justice Masih said, “With the work experience of more than 30 years of 10th schedule in the Constitution, the question that we have to ask ourselves whether the Parliament is confident that the Parliament assigned to Parliament in the Speaker’s high office is to avoid delay in rejecting the issue.”Referring to a series of cases under the Anti-Defection Act, married by speakers in the states delayed, already immersed in many cases by SC, the bench said, “We do not need to answer this question, as the facts of various matters give answers themselves.”
