RB News World Latest News
Related Articles
The Supreme Court expressed concern over the delay in deciding the disqualification petitions of MLAs who joined the Congress from Bharat Rashtra Samiti (BRS). The court has asked the Speaker of the Telangana Legislative Assembly what is meant by “reasonable time” when they are taking so much time to decide on these disqualification petitions. The apex court also said that the rights of any party cannot be violated in a democracy.
The hearing was being conducted by a bench of Justices B.R. Gavai and K. Vinod Chandran. The bench was hearing two separate petitions. One petition was filed by BRS, which said that excessive time was being taken to decide on the disqualification of their MLAs who joined the Congress. The second petition was related to 7 other MLAs who defected.
What did the court say on violation of the rights of parties?
During the hearing, the court asked the Speaker of the Telangana Legislative Assembly what is meant by “reasonable time” to decide on disqualification petitions. The court said, “The rights of parties cannot be violated in a democracy. We fully respect the functioning of the legislature and the executive, but this does not mean that the Act of Parliament should be ignored.”
What did the Telangana High Court say?
The Telangana High Court had issued an order in November 2024, stating that the Speaker of the Assembly should decide on these disqualification petitions within a “reasonable time”. The Supreme Court has now asked the Telangana Assembly Speaker to clarify what the term “reasonable time” means and in how much time it will be completed.
It was said by the officials that the Telangana Assembly Speaker has not set any concrete time limit for deciding on these disqualification petitions, due to which the matter has reached the court. During the hearing, the bench said that if “reasonable time” means to decide within three months except in exceptional circumstances, then it should be brought on priority.
The lawyer appearing for the assembly sought permission from the court to hear the matter after a week. On this, the bench fixed the next hearing of the case on February 18. The lawyer appearing for the petitioners said that a three-judge bench of the Supreme Court had clearly stated that “reasonable time” would mean within three months except in exceptional circumstances.
