"How can we frame law?" Supreme Court on plea to lay down time frame for speakers of assemblies to decide defection petitions

The Supreme Court on Thursday took an unfavourable view of a petition filed seeking directions to the Central government to lay down strict times frame for Speakers of Lok Sabha and State Assemblies and Chairperson of Rajya Sabha to decide disqualification petitions filed against MPs/ MLA for defection to other parties (Ranajit Mukjherjee vs UOI).The plea filed by member of the All India Congress Committee (AICC) Ranajit Mukherjee also sought guidelines or principles to be followed by Speakers in order to have a uniform process of decision making in cases of defections across India..A Bench of Chief Justice of India NV Ramana, AS Bopanna and Hrishikesh Roy observed that the prayers sought by the petitioner fall within the domain of the parliament and the Court cannot frame laws. "How can we frame legislation? Its all a matter of parliament," CJI Ramana said. The Court also said that same issue was raised in the case relating to disqualification of Karnataka MLAs and the same was turned down."I have already expressed my opinion in the Karnataka MLA case. This issue was raised in this case also and Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal had advanced same argument. But we left it to the parliament. Read the judgment and come back," the Court said. The Court then adjourned the matter by two weeks..Mukherjee, in his petition, asked the Court to examine mala-fide delays on the part of the Speakers of legislative assemblies in deciding matters related to political defections. .The petition filed through advocate Srishti Agnihotri stated that rampant practice of political defections, when unchecked due to such delays by Speakers, shakes the confidence of voters and young leaders, and goes against the grain of the Tenth Schedule of the Constitution. "These rampant and unchecked political defections for personal or political gain, hit at the root of Indian democracy, and violate the fundamental rights of Indian Citizens, under Article 21 of the Constitution," the plea said. .The plea submitted that different States show different trends in decision-making as well as in the time taken regarding disqualification of the legislators as required under the Tenth Schedule. "This wide variance in timelines over different states is an injustice done to the public at large, and requires the intervention of this Court in the form of guidelines to achieve the rationale behind passing of the Anti-Defection law," the petitioner submitted..The plea maintained that the decision of the Speaker is final on the question of disqualification of members and that as per the provision of the Tenth Schedule, it was aimed at ensuring that decisions on disqualification of members who engaged in the practice of defections, took place speedily.It was further stated that reason behind giving the Speakers the power to decide questions,of disqualification was "only to make sure that decisions don't take years, as delays would only defeat the purpose.".The petitioner maintained that there is an urgent necessity for laying down guidelines to govern the conduct of Speakers/ presiding officers of Houses, and providing a time-frame within which they must meaningfully implemented. "Not doing so endangers the intensity of the Indian democracy," states the plea. .Interestingly, a Supreme Court Bench headed by Justice Rohinton Nariman had in January 2020 urged Parliament to have a rethink on whether a Speaker ought to decide on disqualification petitions filed under the Tenth Schedule to the Constitution of India.This was after the undue delay by the Speaker of the Manipur Assembly in deciding disqualification petitions against MLA Thounaojam Shyamkumar Singh, then Minister for Forest and Environment in the Manipur government, for defecting to the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) post the 2017 Assembly elections held in the State..Time for Parliament to rethink whether disqualification petitions ought to be entrusted to Speaker: Supreme Court .The Court had in that case given a deadline of 4 weeks to the speaker to decide the plea. Eventually, when the speaker failed to do so, the top court had in an unprecedented order, restrained Shyamkumar Singh from entering the state assembly and also directed that he would cease to be minister. Subsequently, the speaker had passed an order disqualifying Singh. .Follow Bar and Bench channel on WhatsAppDownload the Bar and Bench Mobile app for instant access to the latest legal news.