No respite for disqualified Uttarakhand MLAs from Supreme Court
Speaker of the House, through senior advocate Kapil Sibal, resisted this, saying the court cannot allow them to have the benefit of the Arunachal ruling.

They argued, through senior advocate CA Sundaram, the Speaker disqualified them after they gave a notice about a motion to remove him from the post. This was mala fide and actuated by the bias, he argued, urging the court to extend the benefit of the Arunachal ruling, which said the Speaker must first face removal motion before dealing with disqualification, to them.
Under the rules, he said, the Speaker must face the proceedings before all the then members. This composition was changed by the disqualification, he argued. The House cannot take up the no-confidence motion introduced by them against the Speaker in their presence, he argued.
However, the Speaker of the House, through senior advocate Kapil Sibal, resisted this, saying the court cannot allow them to have the benefit of the Arunachal ruling. That ruling must be applied prospectively and not retrospectively, he said. In any case, he said, the Arunachal Speaker had sought a review of the ruling, arguing it would destroy the Tenth Schedule, which makes defection a sin.
The Economic Times Business News App for the Latest News in Business, Sensex, Stock Market Updates & More.
The Economic Times News App for Quarterly Results, Latest News in ITR, Business, Share Market, Live Sensex News & More.