Begin typing your search...

    Arguments end in OPS, supporting MLAs’ case

    As the arguments in the DMK’s plea to disqualify Deputy Chief Minister O Panneerselvam and 10 other MLAs concluded on Tuesday, the Madras High Court has asked all parties involved in the case to submit their written submissions on Monday.

    Arguments end in OPS, supporting MLAs’ case
    X
    TN Deputy CM O Panneerselvam

    Chennai

    With this, the MHC is seized of three vital cases including the disqualification of 18 MLAs and Gutkha scam, which could have a strong bearing on the ruling dispensation in the state. 

    Senior counsel Kapil Sibal appearing on behalf of the DMK’s whip Sakkarapani, argued before the first bench comprising Chief Justice Indira Banerjee and Justice Abdul Quddhose that since the Speaker failed to act as per the Constitution, the Court has to intervene and ensure the disqualification of Panneerselvam and 10 other MLA’s, who voted against Edappadi K Palaniswami in the confidence motion moved by him. 

    Kapil Sibal further submitted that while OPS, who had conceded through an affidavit before the EC that a whip was issued and that they had voted against it, made a contrary submission to the court that no such whip was issued. This, he said tantamounted to perjury for misleading the court. 

    He also noted that the Speaker, who must act as the leader of the House has acted like a member of a political party. Hence, the OPS group, which voted against the Chief Minister must be declared as disqualified, he added. Senior Counsel PS Raman, appearing on behalf of the disqualified MLA Vetrivel and three other MLAs, submitted that the order of whip is not confined to some MLAs but to all MLAs of the concerned party. Referring to an order of the Supreme Court that those who defy the order of whip can be disqualified, he submitted that the High Court has jurisdiction to pass orders of disqualification. 

    During an earlier hearing, the DMK’s counsel also produced copy of an affidavit filed by Panneerselvam with the EC, and said, “The ruling party, along with the Deputy Chief Minister, committed contempt of court by providing contrary submission before this court by saying that the party whip never passed any orders directing the AIADMK MLAs to vote in favour of the February 18 confidence motion.” 

    But, countering the argument then senior counsel appearing on behalf of the Chief Minister had said that the whip would bind only 122 ‘Koovathur MLAs’ and not the 11 MLAs of the OPS group.

    Visit news.dtnext.in to explore our interactive epaper!

    Download the DT Next app for more exciting features!

    Click here for iOS

    Click here for Android

    migrator
    Next Story