18 MLAs disqualification case: Verdict to be delivered today

While the MLAs were disqualified six months ago, the orders in the case, which witnessed legal luminaries from the country’s top court arguing for and against it, were reserved two months ago.

The much-awaited verdict — either in favour of the 18 MLAs or against them — is poised to create a political upheaval in Tamil Nadu one way or the other.

The ruling AIADMK, which as of now has a mere 113 MLAs in its fold, is bound to face the heat as the numbers game would be crucial. Predictions and analysis range from a change in the government to imposition of President’s rule.

However, several theories are doing the rounds, including the scope of a split verdict in the case, wherein the matter would be referred to a third judge. In such an event, it is advantage AIADMK as it could offer the party a breather to augment the requisite numbers in its favour.

But the bottom line is that the ongoing political war is not bound to conclude immediately after the High Court verdict since with an appeal provision available, the warring factions are bound to move the Supreme Court. It is said that the appeals by both the parties are ready and no time would be lost in moving it immediately after the High Court verdict.

The 18 MLAs were disqualified on September 18, 2017, for meeting the Governor and submitting a representation seeking to change Chief

Minister Edappadi K Palaniswami.

Counsel for Speaker P Dhanapal had contended that if the 18 MLAs were merely seeking a change in the Chief Ministership, which was an intra-party affair, there was no need to go to the Governor seeking to exercise his constitutional power.

It was argued that the tenor of the letter clearly meant that they wanted the Governor to order a Floor test, whereby they could use the opportunity to remove the government in power. Hence, the Speaker being the master of the House did what he did, which was well within his constitutional powers, it was argued.

However, counsel for the disqualified MLAs submitted that their intention of approaching the Governor was merely to get the Chief Minister changed and not to topple the government. It was contended that the episode was more an intra-party aspect and would not fall under the anti-defection law.

The aspect of the Speaker not acting in the case of 11 MLAs led by O Paneerselvam despite them voting against the government defying the party whip, though he had acted on the 18 MLAs for merely submitting a representation also figured in the arguments.