Telangana HC reserves verdict on disqualification of 3 defected BRS MLAs

Hyderabad: The division bench of the Telangana High Court on Tuesday, November 12, reserved its verdict regarding the disqualification of three BRS MLAs – Danam Nagender, Kadiyam Srihari and Tellam Venkat Rao – who defected to Congress after the grand old party assumed power in December 2023.

The bench was hearing a batch of writ appeals filed by Telangana legislative assembly.

The appeals challenge a September 9, 2024 order by a single judge which directed the assembly secretary to submit the disqualification petition of the three defected MLAs before the Speaker for a decision within four weeks. However, due to the speaker’s unavailability, the petitions were sent by registered post to his office on March 30.

The petitions were subsequently submitted directly to the Telangana High Court, bypassing the Speaker’s office entirely. This move has sparked a legal debate surrounding the constitutional authority of the Speaker in disqualification matters, and whether the petitioners had the right to approach the High Court without giving the Speaker adequate time to process the complaints.

Representing the state government, advocate general A Sudarshan Reddy argued the move was a violation of constitutional norms. Reddy condemned the use of “abusive” and “vulgar” language against the Speaker, asserting that such actions undermined the sanctity of the office and violated the principles of the Constitution.

In response, senior counsels P Sri Raghuram, J Ravishanker, and Mayur Reddy, appearing for the defected MLAs, countered that the Speaker, under the tenth schedule of the Constitution, holds the exclusive authority to decide on disqualification matters.

They argued that courts should not intervene prematurely in the process, particularly when the Speaker was allowed to review and act on the petitions. The counsels emphasised that directing the assembly secretary to submit petitions for a decision before the Speaker had reviewed the matter was improper.

Senior counsel Gandra Mohan Rao, representing the Bharat Rashtra Samithi (BRS), highlighted a similar case before the Supreme Court involving the Maharashtra legislative assembly. In that case, the Supreme Court had directed the Speaker to expedite the disqualification proceedings, underlining that such matters could not be delayed indefinitely. Rao argued that a similar approach should be adopted in this case to ensure a swift resolution of the disqualification petitions.

Meanwhile, senior counsel J Prabhakar representing ************BJLP***************** floor leader Alleti Maheshwar Reddy, one of the petitioners, contended that despite repeated attempts to deliver notices to the Speaker’s official residence, it was allegedly refused. This, according to Prabhakar, forced the petitioners to seek judicial intervention in the matter.

Prabhakar further raised concerns over the actions of MLA Danam Nagender, who had won the assembly seat as a BRS candidate, but later contested the Lok Sabha elections as a Congress candidate. Prabhakar argued that Nagender’s actions amounted to grounds for disqualification under the tenth schedule.

After an extensive hearing of arguments from all parties involved, the division bench of the High Court reserved its orders in the batch of three writ appeals. The case has attracted significant attention due to its potential to set important precedents regarding the Speaker’s authority and the constitutional process for handling disqualification petitions in the context of political defections.

The verdict will decide the fate of Danam Nagender, Kadiyam Srihari and Tellam Venkat Rao, who switched to Congress after the transition of power in Telangana. BRS MLAs Padi Kaushik Reddy and KP Vivekananda Goud, as well as BJLP leader A Maheshwar Reddy approached the High Court seeking the disqualification of the three MLAs.