Pass such other further order as this Honble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case.
Therefore, the present petition also is maintainable.
Issue a writ of order and strike down the suspension beyond the second period.
Subsequently, a Privileges Committee was companystituted to inquire into whether the companyduct of the members during the incident dated 19.02.2015 amounted to a breach of privilege.
Hence, the writ petition.
Such a decision was taken by the Speaker allegedly in exercise of the power under Rule 121 2 of the Tamil Nadu Assembly Rules.
The resolution suspended the nineteen members for allegedly obstructing the proceedings of the legislative assembly.
The Speaker also referred to the Privileges Committee of this Assembly the incident dated 19.02.15 to identify those members who attempted to assault the Speaker and the Watch and Ward Staff.
When the Speaker directed the Marshalls to evict the first petitioner from the House because of the alleged unruly companyduct, the remaining petitioners ran to the Speakers podium allegedly to attack the Speaker.
The State legislature and the Speaker do number have the authority to seize the office and the residential premises in the legislative hostel allotted to the petitioners by virtue of their membership in the Legislative Assembly.
However, they were prevented by the Marshalls.
At the very threshold, the petitioners were called upon to satisfy this Court regarding the maintainability of the instant writ petition as for the maintenance of a writ petition under Article 32, the petitioners must demonstrate that there is an infraction of one of the fundamental rights guaranteed to the petitioners under Part III of the Constitution.
They are members of the Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly representing different companystituencies.
Issue a writ of order declaring the proceedings of breach of privilege against the petitioner herein, right from companymencement of the proceedings by the 2nd respondent herein under Rule 226 of the Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly framed under Article 208 of Constitution of India to the subsequent proceedings carried out by the privilege companymittee under rule 229 of the rules including the resolution of the house under rule 229 d dated 19.02.2015 and 31.03.2015 respectively are illegal, failure to companyply with the principles of natural justice, perverse, irrational and violative of the petitioners statutory right under the Tamil Nadu payment of salaries Act, 1951.
Through this resolution, the petitioners were suspended for a period of ten days of the next session of the House.
The Privileges Committee held that the actions of the six petitioners were a breach of privilege, and recommended the action to be taken against the six petitioners.
The Privileges Committee, after an inquiry, recorded a companyclusion that the companyduct of the six petitioners was in breach of the privileges of the House and, therefore, recommended to the House that these six petitioners be removed from the Assembly for 10 days from the companymencement of the next session of the Legislative Assembly and also that during the said period, the petitioners be number paid the salary and be given other benefits to which the members of the House are entitled.
The response of the petitioners is twofold.
Further, it was resolved that the petitioners should number be paid their salaries or given other benefits which are due to them as members of the Legislative Assembly for the period of suspension.
Issue a writ of order and restore all benefits other than that which is companynected with the house.
Issue a writ of order and permit the petitioners to use the office and their residential premises.
Such a recommendation was passed by a resolution of the assembly dated 31.03.2015.
Issue a writ of certiorari calling for the records pertaining to the resolution of the Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly dated 19.02.2015 and 31.03.2015 in awarding multiple punishments to the petitioners on the file of the first respondent so as to quash the same.
The basic facts leading to the present writ petition are as follows On 19.2.2015, the petitioners allegedly resorted to unruly companyduct while the session was in progress.
Aggrieved by the same, the petitioners filed the instant writ petition praying as follows Issue a writ of order declaring the impugned resolution dated 31.03.2015 passed in the Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly, as unconstitutional, illegal, null and void.
The number supply of certain material video recording to the petitioners which was relied upon to record the companyclusion that the petitioners are guilty amounted to denial of a reasonable opportunity and, therefore, number companypliance with the principles of natural justice vitiating the assembly resolution dated 31.03.2015.
By a resolution of the assembly dated 19.02.2015, nineteen members of the assembly, including the six petitioners, have been suspended from the House for the remainder of the period of the then current Session.
All the six petitioners are members of a political party known as DMDK.
Thereafter, the Speaker passed an Order suspending 19 members of the Legislative Assembly belonging to the DMDK party from the Assembly for the remainder of the Session with immediate effect.
That the petitioners fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 19 1 a , 19 1 g , 14 and Article 21 of the Constitution have been violated by the impugned resolution This Court in the case of Raja Ram Pal v. Honble Speaker, Lok Sabha Others, 2007 3 SCC 184, examined the companystitutionality of the proceedings of the Speaker of the Lok Sabha in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 32 of the Constitution of India.
Chelameswar, J. This is a petition filed by six petitioners invoking Article 32 of the Constitution of India.
