With the disqualification of 18 AIADMK MLAs supporting party's ousted deputy general secretary T.T.V. Dhinakaran, the Edappadi K. Palanisamy government in Tamil Nadu has once again gained an upper hand in the 234-member assembly. After their disqualification, the magic number in the state assembly has reduced to 110, while the government already has 111 MLAs by its side.
Even as the ruling AIADMK breathes a sigh of relief, the disqualification of MLAs and the pending petitions in the Madras High Court filed by the opposition DMK and the Dhinakaran faction legislators loom large over the government leading to a constitutional crisis in the state.
In a petition filed by the DMK and the Dhinakaran faction MLAs asking for a floor test, the court had said that no action shall be taken until September 20. In yet another case pertaining to the disqualification of 21 DMK MLAs for allegedly bringing Gutka into the assembly for raising an issue, the court has issued an order staying any action on them.
The MLAs loyal to Dhinakaran were disqualified by Speaker P. Dhanapal under Schedule 10 of the Indian Constitution, which deals with the anti-defection law.
"The Speaker has taken action under Schedule 10 of the Constitution, and therefore the following MLAs are disqualified and therefore they lose their MLA post," said a statement issued by assembly secretary K. Boopathy.
The MLAs are S. Thangatamilselvan (Andipatti), R. Murugan (Harur), S. Mariappan Kennedy (Manamadurai), K. Kadirkamu (Periyakulam), Jayanthi Padmanabhan (Gudiyattam), P. Palaniappan (Pappireddypatti), V. Senthil Balaji (Aravakurichi), S. Muthiah (Paramakudi), P. Vetrivel (Perambur), N.G. Pathiban (Sholingur), M. Kodandapani (Tiruporur), T.A. Elumalai (Poonamallee), M. Rengasamy (Thanjavur), R. Thangadurai (Nilakottai), R Balasubramani (Ambur), S.G. Subramanian (Sattur), R. Sundaraj (Ottapidaram) and Uma Maheswari (Vilathikulam).
Later in the evening, the assembly secretary wrote to the Election Commission of India, asking it to notify the vacancy in these 18 constituencies.
Meanwhile, the CB-CID of Tamil Nadu police on Monday went in search of Senthil Balaji in a Rs 4.25 crore cheating case. The police action was based on a petition filed by an employee in the transport department, who had alleged that Balaji had taken Rs 4.25 crore as bribe to appoint a technical staff in the department when he was the transport minister during 2011-2016 in Jayalalithaa's cabinet.
The EPS faction, say the seniors in the AIADMK, has clearly been gaining upper hand. “The disqualification and the cases against Senthil Balaji and Pappiredipatti MLA Palaniappan are only to make them squirm and defect from the TTV camp,” says a senior leader.
The MLAs, however, have knocked at the door of judiciary to get their disqualification order cancelled.
“The Speaker’s action of disqualifying the MLAs will not stand in the court as the anti-defection law doesn’t apply here. The MLAs in their petition to the governor have only said that they want the chief minister to be replaced and made it very clear that they are part of the AIADMK. So it remains to be seen how the court acts,” says advocate Tamil Mani.
Yeddyurappa case
It may be noted that in the B.S. Yeddyurappa case in Karnataka in May 2011, the Supreme Court had quashed the Speaker’s decision to disqualify 11 rebel BJP MLAs. These MLAs, along with five independent MLAs, were disqualified by the Speaker, a day before the no-confidence motion was moved in the assembly by the Yeddyurappa government. It was alleged that these MLAs were disqualified to stop them from voting against the government as all of them had withdrawn their support to the government. The MLAs went to the Karnataka High Court, where there was a split verdict. The MLAs then moved the Supreme Court contending that their disqualification had raised substantial questions of constitutional and administrative laws of public importance having serious implications for the democratic representative government and involving an interpretation of the provisions of the Tenth Schedule and the rules made there-under.
Tamil Nadu government, however, argues that their case is different from that in Karnataka. “The Yeddyurappa judgement is being quoted by everyone. But here the Speaker gave ample time for the rebel MLAs. Cracking the whip did not happen overnight,” says minister Jayakumar.
In his disqualification order, the Speaker has also mentioned that “the Yeddyurappa judgement refers to a dissent within a party as against defection. The order of the Speaker was set aside in the judgement as he had failed to follow the required procedures. But in this case, the required documents were given to the MLAs and they have filed not one but three reply statements along with documents. Therefore the judgement relied on by the MLAs is on a different set of facts and the same cannot be relied on for the present circumstances.”
Though there are legal options available for the TTV. faction MLAs in the court, it is advantage EPS anyway. By disqualifying these MLAs, the EPS faction has already got the magic number if at all the court orders for a floor test on September 20. More than the Yeddyurappa case, the EPS faction MLAs tend to take precedence from the recent Uttarkhand MLAs case where the Supreme Court declined interim relief for the nine congress MLAs who were disqualified.
Though there are ample number of legal options for both the EPS and TTV factions, the state is heading for a full blown constitutional crisis which will raise issues between the legislature and the judiciary.
“This looks like the state of Tamil Nadu is heading for a full blown constitutional crisis. When the matter is seized off by the Madras High Court, no action can be taken by the Speaker on any issue. Though there is not a stay as far as the disqualification is concerned the crux of the judiciary is that not to take any action as there is already a petition pending in the court seeking floor test which has been posted to September 20. By disqualifying the 18 MLAs it seems the office of Speaker has decided to have a head on collision with the judiciary. In the latest judgment on anti-defection—Yeddyurappa case—the SC clearly ruled that 11 MLAs were disqualified strictly to protect the chief minister. There is still hope on the judiciary,” says senior journalist R. Ramasubramanian.
