Parliamentary Report INDIA Disqualifications in Lok Sabha
MEMBERS DISQUALIFIED FOR VIOLATING PARTY WHIPS The Speaker of Lok Sabha, Hon. Somnath Chatter- jee announced the disqualifi-
Hon. Somnath Chatterjee
cation of four Members of Lok Sabha for violating their party whips during the vote on the motion of confidence moved by the Prime Minister in July 2008. Members of Par- liament belonging to the respective parties had filed petitions under the Tenth Schedule to the Constitution and the Members of Lok Sabha (Disqualification on ground of Defection) Rules, 1985, seeking disqualification of such Members. Professor Ram Gopal
Yadav, MP, had filed separate petitions against Shri Jai Prakash and Professor S.P. Singh Baghel for exercising their votes in violation of the party whip issued on them. Prof. Yadav said that Shri Prakash and Prof. Baghel had been elected to the 14th Lok Sabha as SP candidates and whose names figured in the list of Members belonging to SP published by Lok Sabha. He contended that in spite of the three-line whip issued on them for voting in favour of the motion, they had voted against it, violating the party whip issued by the Chief Whip of the party.This consequently incurred disqualification. Since Shri Prakash and Prof. Baghel
did not file any reply or avail the opportunity of a personal hearing before the Speaker, the matter regarding them was heard ex parte. The Speaker, in his separate decisions given on 11 and 12 September respectively, held that Shri Prakash and Prof. Baghel had incurred disqualifi- cation under paragraph 2 (1) (b) of the tenth schedule of constitution by reason of their casting votes on 22 July against the motion of confidence moved by the Prime Minister. Both Members’ seats fell vacant with effect from 11 and 12 September 2008. In another case, Shri Prab- hunath Singh,MP, Leader of the Janata Dal, had filed a peti- tion against Shri Ram Swa- roop Prasad,MP, Lok Sabha, for his disqualification for cast- ing his vote in violation of the party whip issued on him. Shri Singh had contended that Shri Prasad had been elected as a JD(U) candidate and his name appeared in the list of JD(U) Members, published by the Lok Sabha, as belonging to JD(U). It was stated that whip had been issued on Shri Prasad and other Members of JD (U) to be present in the House on 21 and 22 July for voting against the confidence motion.
Shri Prasad, in his reply to the petition while denying that any whip was issued or served on the him though he was present in the Lok Sabha on those days, contended that in the absence of any whip, he had exercised his right of free- dom of speech as provided in the constitution and voted in favour of the motion and there was no legal impediment in so far the exercise of his vote was concerned. Despite this, the Speaker held that Shri Prasad had incurred disqualification under Para 2(1)(b) of the tenth
schedule of the constitution of India for the reason of his vot- ing in favour of the confidence motion moved by the Prime Minister at the voting held in the House on 22 July. Shri Prasad stood disqualified from continuing as a Member of the 14th Lok Sabha and his seat was declared vacant. The Chief Whip of Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) in Lok Sabha, Shri Santosh Gang- war, also filed a petition against Dr H.T. Sangliana, MP, Lok Sabha, for exercising his vote in violation of the party whip issued on him by the BJP Chief Whip during the motion of confidence moved by the Prime Minister. It was contended by Shri Gangwar that the BJP had issued a three-line whip to all
Chief Whip contended that at a meeting of the BJP Parlia- mentary Party, a whip was dis- tributed amongst all the MPs,
Dr H.T. Sangliana
including Dr Sangliana who attended the meeting and also signed the attendance sheet. In his submission before the
Shri Prabhunath Singh
its Members in Lok Sabha, including Dr Sangliana to be present in the House on 21 and 22 July and vote against the motion. In spite of the whip issued on him by the BJP, Dr Sangliana voted in favour of the motion in violation of the party whip and direction and his voting against the party’s direction had not been con- doned by the party, and thus incurred the disqualification for being a Member of the Lok Sabha.
Dr Sangliana denied having
received any direction from Shri Gangwar either in writing or orally as required. The BJP
Speaker, Dr Sangliana submit- ted that although a meeting was held, no mention, warning or direction was made by any party Member, including the Chief Whip, saying that every Member should vote or should not vote when the motion was moved, etc. He contended that a public direc- tion was not an individual spe- cific direction to a Member and if his voting in the interest of the nation on the civilian nuclear deal had helped a par- ticular party or a particular government, which was in power at that particular point of time, it was only incidental and was purely on the issue of civilian nuclear deal. As there were disputed questions of fact, the Speaker requested both the parties to take oath for giving evidence, if they so desired and the petitioner, on oath, reiterated his submissions made earlier and also stated that on the date of voting he had gone to the seat of Dr Sangliana and had requested him to vote against the motion. Dr San- gliana on oath stated that it was not a fact that the peti-