SC blow to ruling BJP in Karnataka,CM says no fresh confidence vote

PTI

New Delhi/Bangalore, 13 May 2011: In a huge blow to ruling BJP in Karnataka, the Supreme Court today quashed the Assembly Speaker’s controversial decision to disqualify 16 MLAs on the eve of the no-confidence motion last year which had ensured survival of the Yeddyurappa government.

 

Karnataka Chief Minister B S Yeddyurappa said the State government would obey the Supreme Court order but asserted that the question of seeking a fresh vote of confidence in the Assembly does not arise.

 

Congress said it was for the Karnataka unit of the party to decide whether it would press the BJP’s first Government in the South to prove its majority afresh in the Assembly following taoday’s order.

 

A bench headed by justice Altamas Kabir while setting aside Speaker K G Bopaiah’s decision said basic constitutional values and principles of natural justice were not observed by him in disqualifying the 11 rebel BJP and five independent legislators.

 

The apex court passed the order while setting aside the Karnataka High Court verdict upholding the Speaker’s decision, aggrieved by which the disqualified legislators had moved the apex court.

 

The court ruling came on an appeal by four of the 11 disqualified BJP MLAs against the high court order upholding the Speaker’s decision.

 

Asked if he would prove his majority in the House, Yeddyurappa told reporters in Bangalore, "That question (of seeking vote of confidence) does not arise".

 

Noting that the 11 legislators had admitted they are BJP members, Yeddyurappa said they have been asked to attend the budget session of the State Legislature commencing on Monday and they would "continue as BJP members from this moment".

 

"We will obey the order of the Supreme Court", he said, adding, "People are with us; it’s proved today...all the three seats (bypolls) we have won".

 

The Chief Minister asserted that the BJP government enjoyed majority in the 225-member Assembly. The BJP has the support of its 119 members (he included 11 rebels whose disqualification by the Speaker was set aside by the Apex Court today), one independent and the Speaker.

 

JDS chief H D Deve Gowda demanded that the Karnataka Governor H R Bhardwaj exercise his constitutional powers and dismiss Yeddyurappa-led BJP ministry in the wake of the Supreme Court order.

 

Congress while welcoming the Supreme Court verdict said it showed that the earlier judgement of the lower court on the issue was "not correct."

 

Party General Secretary Janardan Dwivedi, however, steered clear of questions whether it would work along with JD-S to provide an alternative to the BJP dispensation in the state. "It is too much to comment at this moment," he said.

 

"It is for the state party to decide," he said when asked whether the Congress would again press the BJP government to prove its majority in the Assembly.

 

The aggrieved MLAs contended that Rule 7 of the anti-defection law mandated that they should be given 7 days’ time to reply to the notice, but the Speaker chose to disqualify them within three days to meet the deadline fixed by the Governor for the voting.

 

They further contended that two other BJP MLAs M P Renukacharya and Narasimha Nayak, who had also withdrawn the support, were spared of the disqualification after they retracted.

 

The apex court said  except for the affidavit filed by K S. Eswarappa, State BJP president and statements of the two MLAs (retracted) there was nothing on record in support of the allegations that the aggrieved MLAs had violated the anti-defection law.

 

"The Speaker apparently did not take into consideration the rule of evidence that a person making an allegation has to prove the same with supporting evidence and the mere fact that the allegation was not denied, did not amount to the same having been proved on account of the silence of the person against whom such allegations are made.

 

"In our view, not only did the Speaker’s action amount to denial of the principles of natural justice to the Appellants, but it also reveals a partisan trait in the Speaker’s approach in disposing of the Disqualification Application filed by Shri B.S Yeddyurappa," the apex court said.

 

The bench said if the Speaker wished to rely on the statements of a third party which were adverse to the MLAs ’ interests, it was obligatory on his part to have given them a hearing.

 

"This conduct on the part of the Speaker is also indicative of the ’hot haste’ with which the Speaker disposed of the Disqualification Petition as complained of by the Appellants, the bench said.

 

The apex court said rules are taken as directory and not mandatory, yet the MLAs were were still required to be given a proper opportunity of meeting the allegations mentioned in the show-cause notices served on them.

 

"The fact that the Appellants had not been served with notices directly, but that the same were pasted on the outer doors of their quarters in the MLA complex and that too without copies of the various documents relied upon by Yeddyurappa, giving them three days’ time to reply to the said notices justifies the Appellants’ contention that they had not been given sufficient time to give an effective reply to the Show-Cause notices," the bench said.

 

The apex court said that since the matter involved the survival of the MLAs, they deserved a better opportunity of meeting the allegations made against them, particularly when except for the newspaper cuttings said to have been filed by Yeddyurappa along with the Disqualification Application, there was no other evidence at all available against them.

 

"Although the same allegations, as were made against the Appellants by Yeddyurappa, were also made against M P Renukacharya and Narasimha Nayak, their retraction was accepted by the Speaker, despite the view expressed by him that upon submitting the letter withdrawing support to the BJP Government led by Yeddyurappa, all the MLAs stood immediately disqualified under paragraph 2(1)(a) of the Tenth Schedule to the Constitution, and they were, accordingly, permitted to participate in the Confidence Vote for reasons which are not required to be spelt out," the bench said.

 

According to the apex court, under this provision the Speaker functions in a quasi-judicial capacity, which makes an order passed by him in such capacity, subject to judicial review.

 

"We are constrained to hold that the proceedings conducted by the Speaker on the Disqualification Application filed by Yeddyurappa do not meet the twin tests of natural justice and fair play.

 

"The Speaker, in our view, proceeded in the matter as if he was required to meet the deadline set by the Governor, irrespective of whether, in the process, he was ignoring the constitutional norms set out in the Tenth Schedule," the bench added.