Tamil Nadu Assembly Speaker J.C.D. Prabhakar’s decision not to pursue the matter of disqualification against 21 legislators of the AIADMK  appears to be a throwback to the treatment that 11 MLAs of the party experienced about eight years ago.

As in the present case, the legislators who faced the prospect of disqualification in 2017 were spared the proceedings in view of the then Speaker, P. Dhanapal, not going after them. However, there were two differences. Back then, no such announcement was made. Furthermore, the matter went to the Madras High Court that dismissed a plea for action against the legislators.

Motion of confidence

On February 18, 2017, a motion of confidence was moved by the then Chief Minister, Edappadi K. Palaniswami, in the Assembly. Eleven MLAs  of his party, including former Chief Minister O. Panneerselvam and former Ministers S. Semmalai and K. Pandiarajan, voted against the motion. Though a whip was said to have been issued for the trust motion and petitions were given to Mr. Dhanapal about a month later, there was no follow-up on his part. In the meantime, the title and symbol of the AIADMK were frozen by the Election Commission. Five months later, the camps of Mr. Palaniswami and Mr. Panneerselvam  came together, burying their differences. Subsequently, the unified formation was recognised as the AIADMK and assigned the symbol of ‘Two Leaves’.

On August 22, 2017, legislators owing allegiance to the rebel leader of the AIADMK, T.T.V. Dhinakaran, submitted letters to Governor Ch.  Vidyasagar Rao, “withdrawing their support” to Mr. Palaniswami. On September 18, the Speaker disqualified 18 legislators on the ground that, through their action, they had “voluntarily” given up the membership of the party to which they belonged.

A week later, DMK whip R. Sakkarapani approached the court for a direction to the Speaker to initiate disqualification proceedings against Mr. Panneerselvam and other AIADMK MLAs. In April 2018, the High Court dismissed the plea on the ground that it would not be appropriate for the court to issue such a direction since the Supreme Court was seized of the larger constitutional issue of the power of courts to give such a ruling. And the case had not challenged any action of the Speaker either.

Petition against Speaker

When the DMK filed another petition alleging inaction on the part of the Speaker on the representations given to him to disqualify the MLAs, the Bench, comprising Chief Justice Indira Banerjee and Justice Abdul  Quddhose, said, “Passing of such orders would amount to not only judicial overreach but also gross breach of judicial discipline, if not contempt.”

When the Dravidian party amended its prayer to demand that the court disqualify the MLAs without issuing a direction to the Speaker to do so, the Bench said such an order could not be passed either, as it would amount to usurping the powers of the Speaker.

Appeal in Supreme Court

Though the DMK moved the Supreme Court with an appeal, it did not secure the relief it had sought. The issue died down in due course, and the Assembly election took place in May 2021, rendering it infructuous.