CHENNAI: The Tamil Nadu Assembly secretary informed the Madras High Court on Monday that the acceptance of resignation of four AIADMK MLAs, who had cross-voted in favour of the TVK government during the confidence motion, will not absolve them of facing the consequences of the ongoing proceedings of disqualification.
The submission was made in a counter-affidavit filed before a division bench of Chief Justice Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari and Justice G Arul Murugan when the petitions filed by AIADMK whip Agri S S Krishnamurthy challenging the acceptance of the resignation of the four MLAs by the Speaker and seeking the quashing of the subsequent notification declaring the four Assembly seats vacant came up for hearing.
Following Maragatham Kumaravel, S Jayakumar, P Sathyabama and Esakki Subaya resigning as AIADMK MLAs and joining the TVK, the AIADMK submitted petitions to Speaker J C B Prabhakar seeking action to disqualify them for cross-voting and defection.
Assembly Secretary R Santhi, in the counter-affidavit, said, “The writ petition is wholly misconceived and proceeds upon a fundamentally erroneous legal premise namely, that the acceptance of a member’s resignation under Article 190 (3) (b) of the Constitution operates to extinguish, defeat or render infructuous the disqualification petition pending against that member under the Tenth Schedule.”
Stating that the SC has authoritatively held that the resignation and disqualification operate in two distinct and independent fields, she said, “The acceptance of resignation does not absolve a member of the consequences of disqualification in respect of conduct anterior to the resignation; the disqualification proceedings survive and remain liable to be adjudicated.”
She said the Speaker has acted strictly within the four corners of Article 190 (b) (3) and the imputation that he exhibited allegiance to any political party is “scandalous and unfounded”.
“The acceptance of a voluntary and genuine resignation under Article 190 (b) (3) is not an adjudicatory determination of a lis between contesting parties calling for an elaborate speaking order. The operative constitutional requirement is the Speaker’s satisfaction as to voluntariness and genuineness which was duly formed,” the secretary stated.
The secretary said the speaker had discharged his constitutional function to accept the “voluntary and genuine” resignation of the four MLAs since there was no material casting doubt on it. Saying that there is no constitutional rule mandating a pending disqualification petition be decided before accepting a resignation, she said the petitions will be adjudicated within a reasonable time.