The disqualification of six Himachal Pradesh MLAs has been upheld by the Supreme Court

On Monday, the Supreme Court declined to revoke the disqualification of six dissident Congress MLAs from Himachal Pradesh, who had been removed from office on February 29 by Assembly Speaker Kuldeep Singh Pathania in accordance with the anti-defection statute.

They were also denied permission to participate in the Assembly sessions while the case was pending before the highest court by a bench headed by Justice Sanjiv Khanna.

Both the stay application and the main writ petition should include a notice. Re-list in the week starting on May 6th, the bench said.

The Bench allowed the petitioners one week to submit any rejoinders they may have and instructed the Speaker of the Himachal Pradesh Assembly to reply to the case within four weeks.

“A notification may be sent by us… However, there won’t be a stay. Second, we need to make a decision on a new election. However, we will not let you to cast a ballot or participate in the Legislative Assembly. Senior attorney Harish Salve, who was representing the petitioners, was informed by Justice Khanna, “We won’t allow you to participate (in the proceedings of the Assembly).”

Inder Dutt Lakhanpal, Chaitanya Sharma, Sudhir Sharma, Ravi Thakur, Rajinder Rana, Devinder Kumar Bhutto, and Ravi Thakur were the six rebel Congress MLAs who were disqualified for refusing to follow a Congress whip and voting in favor of the Himachal Pradesh government during the cut motion and the budget. In the most recent Rajya Sabha election in Himachal Pradesh, they had cast cross-party votes, which helped Congress candidate Abhishek Manu Singhvi lose.

The House’s effective strength has decreased from 68 to 62 due to the disqualification of the dissident Congress MLAs, and the governing Congress now has 34 MLAs as opposed to 40. On behalf of the Speaker, senior counsel AM Singhvi argued that the announcement of the elections had triggered Article 359. “There’s no way to stop any more elections. Additionally, Singhvi said that there is no chance of the disqualification being stayed.

Singhvi was informed by Justice Khanna that the disqualification would not be stayed.

The Bench remarked, “They (EC) can delay it,” as senior lawyer Maninder Singh said on behalf of the Election Commission that notice of the polls will be sent out shortly.

“The writ petition was submitted before the announcement…A bar will open after that, according to Justice Datta.

Senior counsel Satya Pal Jain, representing the renegade Congress MLAs in the case, said that May 7 was the deadline for nomination filings. Before then, he pleaded with the Supreme Court to consider the case.

On March 12, the Bench questioned whether of the petitioners’ basic rights had been infringed and why they hadn’t gone to the Himachal Pradesh High Court.

The dissident Congress MLAs claimed that the disqualification petition violated natural justice principles since they were not given enough time to react.

Jain had filed a claim on behalf of the dissident Congress MLAs, claiming that they were merely provided with a show-cause notice, without a copy of the petition or its appendix, and that they were not granted the required seven days to reply to the notice.