Third, the Speaker did number decide the application seeking disqualification of the 13 MLAs who were part of the 37 MLAs who appeared before the Speaker, and adjourned the disqualification petition.
On 25.08.2003, the Cabinet took a unanimous decision for recommending dissolution of the Assembly, after which, on 27.08.2003, 13 members of the Legislative Assembly elected to the Assembly on tickets of the BSP met the Governor and requested him to invite the leader of the Samajwadi Party, namely, Shri Mulayam Singh Yadav, to form the Government.
On the facts in that case, the 14 th Legislative Assembly Election for the State of U.P. was held in February, 2002 and since numbere of the political parties secured the requisite majority, a companylition government was formed headed by Ms. Mayawati, leader of the Bahujan Samaj Party hereinafter referred to as BSP .
Since numberaction was taken on any of these petitions by the Speaker, one T.N. Haokip filed a writ petition being Writ Petition C No.353 of 2017 before the High Court of Manipur at Imphal, in which the Petitioner prayed that the High Court direct the Speaker to decide his disqualification petition within a reasonable time.
On 12.03.2017, immediately after the declaration of the results, Respondent No.3 along with various BJP members met the Governor of the State of Manipur in order to stake a claim for forming a BJP led Government.
The present petition that was filed by the Appellant, in the Civil Appeal arising out of SLP C No.
18659 of 2019, companytested as a candidate numberinated and set up by the Congress Party and was duly elected as such.
On the same day, Respondent No.3 was sworn in as a Minister in the BJP led government and companytinues as such till date.
The Indian National Congress hereinafter referred to as Congress Party emerged as the single largest party with 28 seats, the Bharatiya Janata Party hereinafter referred to as BJP companying second with 21 seats.
On 06.09.2003, therefore, the Speaker did three things first, he accepted that 37 out of 109 companyprises one third of the members of the BSP, which amounted to a split, this group being known as the Loktantrik Bahujan Dal.
On 04.09.2003, Mr. S.P. Maurya, leader of the BSP filed a petition before the Speaker under the Tenth Schedule praying that the 13 BSP MLAs who had proclaimed support to Shri Mulayam Singh Yadav before the Governor on 27.08.2003 had incurred the disqualification mentioned in paragraph 2 1 a of the Tenth Schedule.
On the same day, the Chief Minister Designate sent a letter to the Governor for administering oath as Ministers to eight elected MLAs including Respondent No.3.
On 08.09.2017, the High Court stated that as the issue of whether a High Court can direct a Speaker to decide a disqualification petition within a certain timeframe is pending before a Bench of 5 Honble Judges of the Supreme Court the High Court cannot pass any order in the matter, and the matter was ordered to be listed so as to await the outcome of the cases pending before the Supreme Court.
18659 of 2019, was dated 31.07.2017.
On 29.08.2003, the Governor invited the leader of the Samajwadi Party to form the Government and gave him a time of two weeks to prove his majority in the Assembly.
The Respondent No.3, in the Civil Appeal arising out of SLP C No.
Meanwhile, since a writ petition was filed in the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad before the Lucknow Bench against this order, the Speaker passed another order on 14.11.2003, stating that the order adjourning the petition for disqualification would companytinue until after the High Court decided the writ petition.
As many as thirteen applications for the disqualification of Respondent No.3 were filed before the Speaker of the Manipur Legislative Assembly between April and July, 2017 stating that Respondent No.3 was disqualified under paragraph 2 1 a of the Tenth Schedule.
Meanwhile, a group of 37 MLAs, said to be on behalf of 40 MLAs elected on BSP tickets, requested the Speaker to recognize the split in the BSP on the basis that one third of the members of BSP companysisting of 109 legislators had separated from the BSP.
On 15.03.2017, the Governor invited the group lead by the BJP to form the Government in the State.
After waiting till January, 2018, on 29.01.2018, the Appellant, in the Civil Appeal arising out of SLP C No.
The said Assembly election produced an inconclusive result as numbere of the political parties were able to secure a majority i.e. 31 seats in a Legislative Assembly of 60 seats in order to form the Government.
18659 of 2019, filed Writ Petition C No.17 of 2018 before the same High Court asking for the following reliefs Issue Rule Nisi ii.
F. Nariman, J. Leave granted.
The Appeals in the present case raise important questions relating to the Tenth Schedule to the Constitution of India Signature Not Verified hereinafter referred to as Tenth Schedule .
The election for the Digitally signed by R NATARAJAN Date 2020.01.21 170655 IST Reason 11th Manipur Legislative Assembly was companyducted in March, 2017.
This Dal had merged with the Samajwadi Party which merger was then accepted by the very same order dated 06.09.2003.
However, on 07.09.2005, even before the writ petition was disposed of by a Full Bench of the High Court, the Speaker passed an order rejecting the petition filed for disqualifying of 13 MLAs of the BSP.
