SC warns Telangana Speaker of contempt for failing to decide on disqualification of 10 BRS MLAs who defected to Congress within a week.

The Supreme Court sternly warned Telangana Speaker Gaddam Prasad Kumar to decide disqualification pleas against 10 defected BRS MLAs within one week. The court warned of contempt proceedings for non-compliance on a plea filed by a BRS MLA.

SC Warns Telangana Speaker of Contempt, Sets One-Week Deadline

The Supreme Court on Monday issued a stern warning to the Telangana Assembly Speaker and Congress leader Gaddam Prasad Kumar for his failure to timely decide the disqualification pleas filed against 10 Bharat Rashtra Samithi (BRS) MLAs who defected to the ruling party (Congress), in the state.

Add Asianet Newsable as a Preferred Source

A bench led by Chief Justice of India (CJI) BR Gavai directed the Speaker to decide the disqualification petitions within one weeks’ time and warned of contempt of court proceedings on non-compliance. “It is for the Speaker to decide, we have already held that he doesn’t enjoy constitutional immunity”, observed the top court.

Contempt Plea by BRS MLA

The Supreme Court’s decision came on a contempt plea filed by BRS MLA Padi Kaushik Reddy against the Telangana Speaker for allegedly not complying with its direction to decide disqualification pleas against the 10 defecting BRS (to Congress) MLAs within three months.

The Court also sought the Speaker’s response on Reddy’s plea within two weeks’ time.

The Court stated that the Speaker’s conduct is in gross contempt of the court. It’s for the Speaker, whether he wants to decide the matter or face contempt by the court, CJI Gavai added.

Background of Previous SC Directive

The apex court on July 31 had directed the Telangana Speaker to decide the disqualification petitions as expeditiously as possible, and in any case, within a three-month timeframe.

The bench had also directed the Speaker of the Telangana Assembly not to allow any MLA to protract the process of disqualification. In case any MLA attempts to protract the proceedings, the Speaker is directed to draw an adverse inference against them, the bench had noted in July.

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by Asianet Newsable English staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)

Leave a Comment