Motive behind MLAs’ resignations irrelevant, Tamil Nadu Assembly Secretary tells Madras High Court
Says, the Speaker is bound to accept the resignations if they are found to be voluntary and genuine; she also terms as “scandalous and unfounded” the allegation of him exhibiting allegiance to TVK
Account subscription benefits alongside Premium Stories, Editorials, Opinions and more. Unlock these with Subscription
The View From India Looking at World Affairs from the Indian perspective.
First Day First Show News and reviews from the world of cinema and streaming.
Today's Cache Your download of the top 5 technology stories of the day.
Data Point Decoding the headlines with facts, figures, and numbers
Health Matters Ramya Kannan writes to you on getting to good health, and staying there
The Hindu On Books Books of the week, reviews, excerpts, new titles and features.
Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly Secretary R. Santhi | Photo Credit: B. Jothi Ramalingam
The law does not require a Legislative Assembly Speaker to sit in judgment over the motive behind a Member of the Legislative Assembly (MLA) tendering resignation and such resignations have to be accepted if they are found to be genuine and voluntary, the Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly Secretary told the Madras High Court on Monday (June 29, 2026).
In a counter affidavit filed before Chief Justice Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari and Justice G. Arul Murugan, through Advocate General Vijay Narayan, Assembly Secretary R. Santhi said, a three-judge Bench of the Supreme Court too in Shrimanth Balasaheb Patil versus Honourable Speaker of Karnataka (2019) had categorically held the motive would be “irrelevant.”
The counter affidavit was filed in response to two writ petitions filed by AIADMK whip Agri S.S. Krishnamurthy. The petitioner had challenged Speaker J.C.D. Prabhakar’s decision to accept the resignations of S. Jayakumar, P. Sathyabama, Maragatham Kumaravel and Esaki Subaya who had been elected on AIADMK tickets from Madurantakam, Perundurai, Dharapuram and Ambasamudram constituencies respectively.
Ms. Santhi said, the Speaker had accepted the resignations because all four MLAs had submitted their handwritten resignation letters in person. “The first respondent (Speaker) upon receipt of the respective resignation letters and after interacting with the Members... and after such inquiry as he thought fit in the facts and circumstances, satisfied himself that the resignation was voluntary and genuine,” she added.
Further, stating there was absolutely no material or circumstance before the Speaker casting any doubt regarding the voluntariness or genuineness of the resignation letters, the Assembly Secretary said, the Speaker had therefore, accepted them in discharge of his constitutional function.
“It is denied that the acceptance was hasty, mechanical, illusory, mala fide, biased, colourable,
📌 Kaynak
Bu haber XML kaynağından derlenmiştir. Tamamı için orijinal habere gidin.
Orijinal haberi oku →