New Delhi/Lucknow, Feb. 14: The Supreme Court today disqualified 13 Uttar Pradesh legislators who had defected from the Bahujan Samaj Party to help Mulayam Singh Yadav wrest power, but the defiant chief minister rejected calls to step down on moral grounds.
“Why should I?” he said. “My government still enjoys majority and on February 26, when the House reconvenes, we will prove our strength again.”
The apex court’s verdict will not rock Mulayam’s boat but is a moral blow ahead of elections as it virtually says the formation of the Samajwadi Party-led government in late 2003 was unconstitutional.
The 13 MLAs broke away when Mayavati resigned as chief minister in August 2003 and extended support to Mulayam. Joined later by 27 fellow BSP rebels, the group of 40 later merged with Mulayam’s party. The BSP petitioned the Speaker to disqualify the 13, but its appeal was rejected .
The apex court, which upheld Allahabad High Court’s order that quashed the rebels’ merger with Mulayam’s party, justified stepping into the Speaker’s domain. The five-judge bench, headed by Chief Justice K.G. Balakrishnan, said the Speaker had erred in recognising the split.
The judges said the Speaker committed an error “so fundamental, that even under a limited judicial review the order of the Speaker has to be interfered with”.
They added that normally the matter should have been referred back to the Speaker but the Assembly was coming to an end and allowing the rebels to stay on in the House even for a day would be “illegal and unconstitutional”.
A decision on the 13 had to be taken to “protect the Constitution and its values and the principles of democracy”, the bench added. So the 13 MLAs were being “disqualified with effect from 27.8.2003.”
Mulayam “welcomed” the order but said he would not ask the disqualified MLAs, many of them ministers in his cabinet, to resign. His “open defiance” has sparked outrage among Opposition parties and several have begun approaching the governor.
FAQs about the controversy
What was the row about?
It started with 13 BSP legislators breaking away after Mayavati resigned as chief minister on August 25, 2003. They extended support to Mulayam, who became chief minister on August 29, and were later joined by 27 other BSP MLAs. This group later merged with Mulayam’s Samajwadi Party (SP).
The BSP, which had 98 MLAs, petitioned the Speaker to disqualify the first breakaway batch of 13, as it fell short of the 1/3 required to get around the anti-defection law.
Could Mulayam have formed the government without the BSP defections?
No. The SP had 142 MLAs, 60 less than simple majority in the 403-strong House. Still short by 20 even after the defections, he bridged the deficit with the help of 10 Independents and 11 Congress defectors.
What was the Speaker’s ruling on the BSP petition?
Speaker Kesrinath Tripathi (of the BJP) and later Mata Prasad Pandey (SP) ruled that since the defectors came to the House together in a group of 40, they had more than the 1/3 needed under the defection law.
What did Mayavati do then?
Mayavati moved Allahabad High Court, which in February 2006 termed as illegal the merger of the 40 with the SP as the first group of 13 was formed on August 27 while the rest joined later. But it referred the disqualification issue back to the Speaker.
Who moved the Supreme Court?
The BSP rebels, against the high court order. But the apex court disqualified the first breakaway group of 13.
Can the other BSP defectors continue to support Mulayam?
Yes, because the high court has recognised the group as a separate entity.
Will Mulayam lose his majority now?
No, even if the 33 rebels — two have died and five returned to the BSP — are expelled, Mulayam will have the support of 190 MLAs, five more than the majority mark.
