HYDERABAD: A division bench of the Hyderabad High Court, on Monday, reserved its interim order till Tuesday, in an appeal filed by the Andhra Pradesh legislative affairs department challenging a single judge order staying operation of the Assembly resolution suspending YSRC MLA R K Roja from the state assembly for a period of one year.
Advancing his arguments on behalf of the state legislative affairs department before the bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Dilip B Bhosale and Justice P Naveen Rao, senior advocate of Supreme Court P P Rao while relying on various judgments of the Supreme Court and High Courts of the country, contended that the Courts cannot have judicial review on an order passed by the Legislature. “In fact, the House has got inherent powers in suspending a member from the Assembly,” he noted.
Rao, while admitting that the motion which was moved in the House by quoting Rule 340 of the AP Legislative Assembly to suspend the respondent MLA was wrong, said that under Article 194(3) of the Constitution the Legislature has source of power to rectify that wrong. “In view of correcting the wrong under Article 194 (3), it cannot be taken as a wrong order,” he submitted.
In fact, the petitioner MLA during the discussion on “Call Money racket” issue was suspended from the House on certain grounds which included that she had used abusive and vulgar language and made derogatory remarks against the leader of the House, but not for obstructing the proceedings. The Rules which are ‘wrongly quoted’ should not be taken into consideration, but should see whether the House has got the power or not in taking such an action against a member, he submitted.
On the other hand, senior counsel of Supreme Court Indira Jaising, appearing for MLA Roja, raised an objection saying that the appeal was filed by the AP government though the decision to suspend the member was taken by the Assembly.
Intervening, Justice Bhosale questioned how the government could file an appeal on behalf of the legislature?
In reply, Rao said that in the House the motion to suspend the petitioner MLA was moved by the minister for legislative affairs and the ministry was represented by its secretary who has right to move the appeal on behalf of the state, he explained.
When Rao submitted that the member suspension motion was moved based on the behavior of the member and if the member had tendered apologies on the day this situation would not have been aroused, Justice Bhosale asked Jaising whether they are prepared to tender apology to the House.
In reply, Jaising said that it does not arise at this stage as the government is viewing the issue as a battle between the Legislature and Judiciary. In fact, no opportunity was given to the member to explain before suspending her from the House, she pointed out.
Disputing with the said allegation, Rao said that the House may proceed at once as it is a case involving the dignity of the House and the case pertains to usage of abusive language.
Refuting with the contentions of Rao, Jaising argued that a mistake committed by the House cannot be rectified by the Courts. It is not a fit case for the Court to interfere in the appeal. She alleged that the House did not comply with the principles of natural justice while suspending the member. Though 66 MLAs of YSRC had gathered at the Speaker’s podium to stage their protest on Dec 18, 2015, the House suspended only the respondent MLA which exhibits the vindictive nature and ego of the ruling party, the senior counsel pointed out.
While contending that it is not a fit case for interference of the court to grant interim suspension of single judge order, Jaising said that an irreparable loss to the rights of the member would cause if the suspension was not revoked. Further, the member could not raise the public issues of her constituency before the House in the ongoing budget session, she added.
When the bench pointed out that the single judge did not give any order directing the respondents to allow the member to participate in the sessions, Jaising said the single judge observed that the member has a right to participate in the session.
The bench then asked whether there is any bar in correcting the mistake, the senior counsel replied that the mistake was admitted by the government and not by the House, and the House has power to recall its order and rectify the mistake.
After hearing the arguments, the bench said it would dictate the interim orders on Tuesday and made it clear they are confining the order to the interim prayer of the appellant.
Assembly Seeks Apology from Roja
Providing another opportunity to YSRC MLA RK Roja to get her suspension from the House revoked, Andhra Pradesh Assembly on Monday adopted a resolution, saying that it is ready to forgive her, provided she apologises for her alleged ‘inappropriate behaviour’ before the privileges panel. Indicating that he is not ready to stretch Roja’s suspension issue to further more, Speaker Kodela Sivaprasada Rao, after winding up a lengthy debate on the same subject in the House, said the House was giving her another chance to express regrets for her ‘unacceptable behaviour’ in the Assembly during previous winter session of it and ‘objectionable’ remarks made at CM N Chandrababu Naidu on Dec 18, 2015.