Telangana Assembly Speaker Gaddam Prasad Kumar on Wednesday dismissed the final disqualification petitions against two Bharat Rashtra Samithi (BRS) MLAs—Danam Nagender (Khairatabad) and Kadiyam Srihari (Station Ghanpur)—thereby clearing all 10 BRS legislators accused of defecting to the ruling Congress, after winning on BRS tickets in the December 2023 Assembly elections.
The complete list of cleared MLAs includes Danam Nagender (Khairatabad), Tellam Venkat Rao (Bhadrachalam), Kadiyam Srihari (Station Ghanpur), Pocharam Srinivas Reddy (Banswada), Dr M. Sanjay Kumar (Jagtial), Arekapudi Gandhi (Serilingampally), T. Prakash Goud (Rajendranagar), B. Krishna Mohan Reddy (Gadwal), G. Mahipal Reddy (Patancheru), and Kale Yadaiah (Chevella).
The Speaker consistently ruled across batches that there was no conclusive documentary—or legally sustainable—evidence proving voluntary defection or abandonment of BRS membership under the Tenth Schedule (anti-defection law).
This verdict came just one day before a scheduled Supreme Court hearing on BRS petitions challenging the prolonged delays, which technically would have allowed the MLAs to retain their Assembly seats and BRS affiliation while maintaining evident ties with Congress.
These decisions were expected due to the Speaker's alignment with the ruling Congress.
The defections began in March-April 2024, shortly after Congress assumed power, prompting the BRS to file a disqualification petition between March 18 and April 8, 2024. Despite the Supreme Court's interventions—starting with a July 31, 2025 directive (in Padi Kaushik Reddy v. State of Telangana) to conclude proceedings expeditiously within three months—the Speaker delayed significantly.
The apex court, led by the then-Chief Justice B.R. Gavai, later issued contempt notices in November 2025 for non-compliance, demanded status reports, and granted extensions (including a final three-week window on February 6, 2026), accompanied by stern contempt warnings.
Batches of dismissals followed: five MLAs in December 2025 (Arekapudi Gandhi, Mahipal Reddy, Tellam Venkat Rao, Bandla Krishna Mohan Reddy, T. Prakash Goud), two in January 2026 (Pocharam Srinivas Reddy, Kale Yadaiah), one in early February 2026 (M. Sanjay Kumar), and the final two on March 11.
This saga underscores how political loyalty often trumps constitutional duty, rendering the anti-defection law ineffective when the ruling party benefits. Congress, now in power, protects these MLAs after vehemently opposing similar tactics in opposition. The party that once decried "MLA poaching" now facilitates alignments that bolster its majority.
The BRS, meanwhile, has much to answer for its own record. During K. Chandrashekar Rao's two terms (2014-23), the party engineered massive defections to consolidate power. In the first term (2014-2018), it absorbed 47 representatives: four MPs, 25 MLAs, and 18 MLCs from parties like TDP, Congress, YSRCP, BSP, and CPI.
Key moves included the 2016 merger of 11-12 TDP MLAs—effectively eliminating TDP's Assembly presence. In the second term (2018-2023), another 14 MLAs defected (12 from Congress, two from TDP), pushing the total Opposition MLAs poached to 36-39 (as per Congress claims), plus MLCs and MPs.
Many defectors received cabinet berths without resigning their seats, bypassing strict anti-defection enforcement.
The BRS is said to have used "MLA chori" in Telangana—mergers to avoid disqualifications—to its advantage, and yet, it now protests without acknowledging or apologising for its past. Ironically, the TRS (now BRS) had itself suffered defections under Y.S. Rajasekhara Reddy in united Andhra Pradesh (2004-2009), where internal divisions weakened the party for a few years.
When Congress and BRS are the major players in the Telangana defections episode, why should the BJP too feel a cause for concern? It is because the BJP is the single largest beneficiary of defections.
An Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) analysis of 2014-2021 defections shows that the BJP absorbed around 173 MPs and MLAs (35 per cent of all defectors), while only 7 per cent left the BJP—making it the principal gainer, with Congress losing the most (35 per cent of defectors originated from it).
A separate ADR report on 2016-2020 found 182 of 405 re-contesting defecting MLAs (44.9 per cent) joined the BJP, while 170 (42 per cent) left Congress.
In Goa, the BJP turned a hung Assembly into a stable majority via Congress defections.
After the 2017 elections—Congress's 17 seats, BJP's 13 in the 40-member House—10 Congress MLAs defected to the BJP in July 2019. Claiming over two-thirds of the Congress Legislature Party, they invoked Paragraph 4(2) of the Tenth Schedule for a "deemed merger", avoiding disqualification.
The Speaker approved it, strengthening Chief Minister Pramod Sawant's government. The Congress challenged this, but the Goa Bench of the Bombay High Court upheld the decision on February 24, 2022, ruling that the merger exception applied solely based on the legislature party agreement, needing no national merger. Critics slammed it for enabling horse trading.
The pattern recurred after the 2022 elections (BJP's 20 seats, Congress's 11). On September 14, 2022, eight Congress MLAs defected to the BJP using the same two-thirds claim. The Speaker rejected disqualification petitions in November 2024, while the Goa Bench upheld this on January 16, 2025, citing the 2022 precedent and the Supreme Court's views.
The Supreme Court in December 2024 declined a direct hearing, sending the matter back to the High Court. These rulings marginalised Congress from a strong opposition to near-irrelevance, while also letting the BJP complete full terms with solid majorities, exposing how judicial backing of the merger loophole aids political flips in Goa.
In Maharashtra, Eknath Shinde's 2022 split (around 40 of 56 Shiv Sena MLAs) toppled the Uddhav Thackeray government, installing a BJP-backed regime; Ajit Pawar's 2023 defection (more than eight NCP MLAs) further solidified control.
Similar 'Operation Lotus' patterns occurred in Madhya Pradesh (Jyotiraditya Scindia plus 22 Congress MLAs in 2020, collapsing Kamal Nath government), Karnataka (17 MLAs in 2019 toppling Congress-JDS), Manipur, Arunachal Pradesh, and others—expanding BJP's footprint through engineered switches that have often been widely criticised.
Why do the parties encourage political defections? This is because the Anti-Defection Law (Tenth Schedule, inserted via the 52nd Amendment in 1985 under Rajiv Gandhi) remains flawed.
It bestowed the Speaker with near-absolute power and no mandatory timelines, allowing indefinite delays. It took almost 40 years to curb this arbitrary power, which is a troubling fact.
The Supreme Court in Kihoto Hollohan v. Zachillhu (1992) struck down Paragraph 7's bar on judicial review, enabling scrutiny for bias, perversity, or inaction.
Subsequent rulings expanded oversight: Rajendra Singh Rana (2007) allowed intervention for non-action, while Keisham Meghachandra Singh (2020) mandated "reasonable" time (often a three-month guideline).
The Telangana case reinforced strict timelines and contempt threats, and yet, partisan rulings persist. Chronic delays—such as some petitions that have been pending for 3-5 years across states like Maharashtra (average of 28 months), Karnataka (19 months), Madhya Pradesh (22 months)—erode the law's purpose.
The Speaker's office, meant to be constitutional, has become politicised, with decisions favouring ruling parties.
The real point of contention lies in how Congress, BRS, BJP and other political parties make use of defections for power, opposing them in Opposition, but encouraging them in government—betraying voters' mandate and democratic integrity. Today, we are seeing the Speaker turning into a political figure instead of a constitutional authority. It is high time that the judiciary fixed a deadline for Speakers—probably 45 working days—to decide on the defections issue.
The judiciary must fix a deadline for itself too—probably 90 working days. If either the Speaker or the judiciary delay their decisions, political defections will continue to take place—which no party should have the power to encourage.