SC upholds Arunachal Speaker's decision accepting resignation of 2 Cong MLAs
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday upheld a Gauhati High Court judgment dismissing the plea of two Congress MLAs, who challenged the Arunachal Pradesh Speaker’s decision to accept their resignation, which they claimed was given under duress.
A Bench of Justices Anil R. Dave and A.K. Goel said ‘once a Speaker of a Legislative Assembly accepts the resignation of the MLAs, courts will not go into the circumstances or what political strategy that required the MLAs to tender resignation.’
Senior counsel L Nageswara Rao, appearing for the two MLAs, Wanglam Sawin and Gabriel Denwang Wangsu, argued that the resignation was obtained under duress on September 16, 2015 along with the resignation of 15 other MLAs but the Speaker chose to accept only their resignation, which they came to know only when the notification was issued to this effect on October 1.
Counsel said it was the duty of the Speaker to make an enquiry whether such a resignation was made particularly when the MLAs had not submitted them directly to the Speaker. He said when the MLAs say that they had not resigned on their free will, the benefit of doubt should go to them and not to the Speaker.
The Bench asked the counsel “Can we entertain a doubt about Speaker’s decision and go beyond it. The Constitution has given power to the Speaker to accept resignations of legislators. From which source the resignation letter was received, this itself, may not give room for suspicion. The question is whether the Speaker can be compelled to hold an enquiry if there is no suspicion and if the signature is genuine. The Speaker can accept resignation without an enquiry but he cannot accept the same without an enquiry, that is the position.”
Counsel drew the court’s attention that the resignation was not in the prescribed format and that they had stated that their resignation was irrevocable as they did not live up to the expectations of the people.
The bench said “this by itself will not vitiate the Speaker’s decision in accepting the resignation. Can’t the MLAs confess that they have not lived upto people’s expectation. Why should the Speaker doubt their letter. If you knowledge about the letter which you say was obtained under duress, why were you sleeping for 15 days. You should have informed him that the letter was not signed under free will. Once you sign the resignation you should know that it is meant for the Authority to whom it is addressed. You could have informed the Speaker the next day itself. You make a hue and cry after 15 days.” The Bench then dismissed the appeals against the High Court order.
