The court upheld the decision not to disqualify Congress MLAs who joined the BJP in 2022. On November 1 last year, Assembly Speaker Ramesh Tawadkar dismissed the disqualification plea against eight MLAs: Digambar Kamat, Aleixo Sequeira, Sankalp Amonkar, Michael Lobo, Delilah Lobo, Kedar Naik, Rudolf Fernandes, and Rajesh Faldesai. The plea sought action against them under anti-defection laws. However, the Speaker ruled in their favor, allowing them to retain their positions despite switching parties.
Panaji: The Goa bench of the Bombay High Court upheld the assembly speaker Ramesh Tawadkar’s decision not to disqualify eight Congress MLAs who joined the ruling BJP on September 14, 2022.
On November 1 of last year, Tawadkar dismissed a disqualification petition concerning MLAs Digambar Kamat, Aleixo Sequeira, Sankalp Amonkar, Michael Lobo, Delilah Lobo, Kedar Naik, Rudolf Fernandes, and Rajesh Faldesai.
This petition filed by former Goa Pradesh Congress Committee president Girish Chodankar.
Chodankar challenged Tawadkar’s ruling in the High Court on January 6 of this year.
However, on Thursday, the division bench of Justices Makarand Karnik and Nivedita Mehta rejected Chodankar’s petition and upheld the speaker’s decision.
As a result of these defections, the BJP’s strength in the 40-member assembly increased to 28.
The case is about eight Congress MLAs from Goa who joined the BJP in September 2022. This move caused a lot of debate and led to a disqualification petition under the Tenth Schedule of the Constitution, which deals with anti-defection laws.
The petition claimed that their switch violated rules meant to stop elected leaders from changing parties for personal or political benefits, breaking the trust of voters.
In November 2022, Goa Assembly Speaker Ramesh Tawadkar rejected the disqualification request, citing legal and procedural reasons. The opposition and others challenged this decision in court, saying it set a bad example for democracy.
The opposition parties and other petitioners challenged this decision in court, arguing that it set a dangerous precedent for democratic processes. They contended that such defections undermine the spirit of the anti-defection law, which was introduced to ensure stability and accountability within the political system. The petitioners also expressed concerns over the potential misuse of this law to justify political opportunism.
However, the court upheld the Speaker’s decision, allowing the MLAs to keep their positions. This case raises concerns about how effective anti-defection laws are in preventing political switching.
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
