JAGJLT SINGH versus STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.

JAGJLT SINGH versus STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.

The Speaker's orders disqualifying the petitioners are not illegal or unreasonable. Denial of cross-examination and evidence does not automatically amount to violation of natural justice. Protection under Paragraph 3 of Tenth Schedule is unavailable to single-member legislature parties. The Speaker correctly determined that the petitioners had joined another political party and failed to establish a bona fide split warranting Paragraph 3 protection.

Parties
Petitioner: JAGJIT SINGH; Respondent: STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
11 December 2006
Procedural Posture
Writ Petition / Final Judgment
Outcome
Writ Petitions dismissed
Legal Topics
Anti Defection, Natural Justice, Legislative Disqualification, Judicial Review, Interpretation of Statutes
Constitutional Law Anti Defection Natural Justice Legislative Disqualification Judicial Review Interpretation of Statutes

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

JAGJIT SINGH

Petitioner

STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Writ Petition / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether denial of opportunity to cross-examine and lead evidence amounts to violation of principles of natural justice
  2. 2 Whether the Speaker's orders of disqualification are mala fide and illegal
  3. 3 Whether members elected as independents or sole members of their respective parties are entitled to protection under Paragraph 3 of the Tenth Schedule

Ratio Decidendi

The Speaker's orders disqualifying the petitioners are not illegal or unreasonable. Denial of cross-examination and evidence does not automatically amount to violation of natural justice. Protection under Paragraph 3 of Tenth Schedule is unavailable to single-member legislature parties. The Speaker correctly determined that the petitioners had joined another political party and failed to establish a bona fide split warranting Paragraph 3 protection.

Court Disposition

Writ Petitions dismissed

Orders

  • Writ Petition Nos.287/2004 and 290 to 294/2004 are dismissed.