AIR 1998 SUPREME COURT 3340 ::1998 AIR SCW 3281 ::1998 ALL. L. J. 2550 ::1998 (7) ADSC 533 ::1998 ADSC 7 533 ::1998 (7) SCC 517 ::(1998) 5 Scale 517 ::1999 (2) SCJ 82 ::(1998) 8 Supreme 16 ::(1998) 7 JT 36 (SC) ::1998 (7) JT 36

Supreme Court Of India

Hon'ble Judge(s): M. M. Punchhi, K. T. Thomas, M. Srinivasan , JJJ

Constitution of India , Sch.X Para.6(1)— Defection - Split in political party - Cognition by Speaker - Judicial review - Scope - Matter referred to Constitution Bench. Per M. M. Punchhi, CJI - In Kihoto Hollonan v. Zachillhu, 1992 AIR SCW 3497 the majority has summed up the nature of the function exercised by the Speaker/Chairman under Para. 6 (1) to be that of a Tribunal and the Scope of judicial review under Arts. 136, 226 and 227 of the Constitution in respect of an order passed by the Speaker/Chairman under Para. 6 to be confining to jurisdictional errors only viz., infirmities based on violation of constitutional mandate, mala fides, non-compliance with rules of natural justice and perversity. The question however as to whether a Member of the House has become subject to disqualification must arise for decision under Para 6(1) of the Tenth Schedule only on its being referred for decision of the Speaker/Chairman and not on his own, whose decision shall be final. The defence against disqualification incurred on ground of defection under Para. 2 is separately provided in Para. 3 to say that such disqualification is not to apply to a case of split. Is not the cognition of the Speaker/Chairman of the occurrence of split not administrative in nature, unconnected with decision making on disqualification, or is it an adjunct thereto? Kihoto Hollohan is silent o....