Key Facts

The political and constitutional dispute over the disqualification proceedings against four former AIADMK MLAs in Tamil Nadu has drawn attention to the scope of the Tenth Schedule of the Constitution and the quasi-judicial authority of the Assembly Speaker. The MLAs, who shifted allegiance and participated in political campaigns opposing their party whip, face petitions seeking disqualification on grounds of 'voluntarily giving up membership' of the political party under Paragraph 2(1)(a) of the Tenth Schedule. The Legislative Assembly Secretariat confirmed that proceedings are being conducted under the Members of the Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly (Disqualification on Ground of Defection) Rules, 1986.

GK Context

The anti-defection law was inserted into the Constitution via the 52nd Constitutional Amendment Act, 1985, creating the Tenth Schedule to curb political opportunism and unprincipled party floor-crossing. Paragraph 2(1)(a) disqualifies a member if they voluntarily give up party membership (which the Supreme Court in Ravi S. Naik [1994] held can be inferred from conduct), while Paragraph 2(1)(b) penalises voting or abstaining contrary to party whip. In Kihoto Hollohan v. Zachillhu (1992), a Constitution Bench upheld the Speaker's powers as a tribunal, ruling that decisions are subject to judicial review on grounds of mala fides or violation of natural justice, while Keisham Meghachandra Singh (2020) ruled that Speakers should ideally decide defection petitions within three months.