The Supreme Court on Monday issued a contempt notice to the Telangana speaker for not complying with its direction to decide disqualification pleas against 10 BRS MLAs, who had defected to the ruling Congress.
On July 31, a top court bench headed by Chief Justice B R Gavai had directed the assembly speaker to decide in three months the matter of the disqualification of the 10 Bharat Rashtra Samithi (BRS) MLAs.
The CJI-led bench termed the non-compliance of its earlier directions as the “grossest kind of contempt” while issuing notices to the speaker and others on the pleas filed by the BRS leaders.
The bench, however, exempted Telangana Speaker and others from personal appearance before it till further orders.
The bench also issued notice on a separate plea filed on behalf of the office of the speaker seeking extension of time by eight more weeks to decide the disqualification pleas.
Senior advocates Mukul Rohatgi and Abhishek Singhvi, appearing along with lawyer Sravan Kumar for the office of the speaker, said they were seeking extension of time.
The hearing on four disqualification pleas are complete and in three cases recording of evidence has concluded, said one of the lawyers.
“This should have been concluded…This is the grossest kind of contempt…It is for him to decide where he wants to celebrate the new year,” the CJI said.
The bench has now posted the matters for further hearing after four weeks.
Rohatgi assured the bench that he would personally convey the feelings of the court to the office of the speaker and hopefully, decisions will be taken in four weeks.
On November 10, the top court agreed to hear on November 17 the petition seeking contempt proceedings against the Telangana speaker.
The contempt plea stems from the apex court’s July 31 judgment, delivered by a bench of the CJI and Justice AG Masih, in a batch of writ petitions filed by BRS leaders KT Rama Rao, Padi Kaushik Reddy, and KO Vivekanand.
The top court reiterated that the speaker acts as a tribunal while deciding disqualification pleas under the Tenth Schedule of the Constitution and consequently does not enjoy “constitutional immunity”.
The Tenth Schedule deals with provisions on disqualification on the grounds of defection.