18 MLAs’ case and OPS issue are different: Counsel

Arguing before the bench comprising Chief Justice Indira Banerjee and Justice M Sundar, Former Attorney General of India Mukul Rohatgi appearing for the AIADMK whip S Rajendran, refused to put forth any argument on the aspect of OPS and others defying the party whip. 

He said he was confining his arguments that the Speaker’s decision in disqualifying the 18 MLAs was right and that he has no further instructions. However, when a pointed question was put forth by Justice M Sundar in this regard to senior counsel CS Vaidyanathan appearing for Chief Minister Eddappaddi K Palaniswamy, he said the issue ought to be heard separately and could not be related to the disqualification of the 18 MLAs as issues like whether a whip was issued at the first place must be established. 

Quoting former Prime Minister PV Narasimha Rao that ‘not taking a decision itself is a decision’ he said the OPS group consciously decided that Sasikala, could not be their leader and subsequently the Chief Minister and other members on realising that it was politically immoral to project a convict as a leader had to change their stance. With the Election Commission also recognizing the OPS faction as a separate group, the Speaker had to take a view accordingly. 

However, a major part of the argument revolved around the aspect that the Speaker could draw an inference based on political propriety and political morality of the said MLAs.