Skip to main content

Anti defection law

 ANTI-DEFECTION LAW


The 52nd amendment act of 1985 provided for the disqualification of the Members of parliament

and the state legislatures on the ground of Defection from one party to another. for this purpose, it

made changes In four article of the constitution [ 101,102,190,191] & added a new Schedule (tenth

schedule). This act is often referred to as the anti- Defection law. 91st amendment act 2003.it

omitted the exception Provision, that is, disqualification on the ground of defection not to Apply in

case of split.

Provision of the Act:

 The tenth schedule contains the following provision with respect to the disqualification of

members of parliament and the state legislatures on the ground of defection.

Grounds for the Disqualifications:

1. A members of a house belonging to any political party becomes disqualified for being a

members of the house.

a. If an elected members gives up his membership of such political Party.

b. If he votes or abstain from voting in such house contrary to any direction issued by

his political party.


2. If any member who is independently elected joins any party.

3. If any nominated member joins any political party after the end of six Month.

Notes:

The decision on disqualification question on the ground of defection is referred to the speaker or the

chairman of the house,his/her decision is Final.

Exception:

The disqualification on the ground of defection does not apply in the Following two case:

1. If a member goes out of his party as a result of a merger of the party. A merger takes place

when two-thirds of the members of the party have agreed to such merger.

2. If a member,after being elected as the presiding of house , voluntary gives up membership

of party or rejoins it after he ceases to hold that office .this exemption has been provided in

view of the dignity and impartiality of the office.

Deciding authority

Any question regarding disqualification arising out of defection is to be decided by presiding officer

of the house. Originally ,the act provide that the decision of the presiding officer is final and cannot

be question in any court.

[kihoto hollon case] the supreme court

Declared this provision as unconstitutional on the ground .that it seeks to take away the jurisdiction


of the supreme court and high court .the court rejected the contention that the vesting of

adjudicatory powers in the presiding officer is by itself invalid on the ground of political bias.

Rule Making Power

The presiding officer of a house is empowered to make rules to give effect to the provision of the

tenth schedule. All such rules must be placed before the house for 30 days.the house may approve

or modify or disapprove them. According to this rule, the presiding officer can take up a defection

case only when he receives a complaint from a member of the house .before taking the final

decision ,he must give the member a chance to submit his explanation . He also refer the matter to

the committee of privileges for inquiry.


Advantage:

1. Provide stability to the government

2. More concentration is possible

3. Promotes party discipline

4. Ensures that candidate remain loyal to the party as well as the citizens voting for him.

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Section 58B of The Advocates Act - Special provision relating to certain disciplinary proceedings

 Section 58B The Advocates Act Description (1) As from the 1st day of September, 1963, every proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate of a High Court shall, save as provided in the first proviso to sub-section (2), be disposed of by the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if the existing advocate had been enrolled as an advocate on its roll. (2) If immediately before the said date, there is any proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate pending before any High Court under the Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926 (38 of 1926), such proceeding shall stand transferred to the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if it were a proceeding pending before the corresponding Bar Council under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 56: Provided that where in respect of any such proceeding the High Court has received the finding of a Tribunal constituted under section 11 of the Indian B
Post a Comment
Read more

Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of ClaimantCase Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant. TOLLEY Vs, J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement. Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be asked to resign from his respective club. Furthermore, there was evidence that the possible adverse effects of the caricature on the claimant’s reputation were brought to the defendants’ attention. The trial judge found that the caricature could have a defamatory meaning. The jury then found in favor of the claimant. Held The House of Lords held that in the circumstances of this case – as explained by the facts – the caricature was capable of constituting defamation. In other words, the publication could have the meaning alleged by the claimant. The Lords also ordered a new trial limited to the assessment of damages. NEWSTEAD V LANDON EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD, (1939) Facts: A newspaper published a defamatory article about Harold Newstead. However, another person with this name brought an action in libel. He claimed that the article had been misunderstood as leading to him. The defendant newspaper recognised that they published the article. Also, they denied that they had the intention of being defamatory of him. Consequently, the claimant argued that the newspaper was under a duty. The duty was to give a clear and complete description of the correct person. Moreover, the claimant argued that the defendants were in breach of the duty. Issues: The issue in Newstead v London Express Newspaper, was if the reasonable persons would have understood the words complained of to refer to the plaintiff. Held: The Court of Appeal stated that in accordance with the current law on libel, liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer; but on the fact of the defamation. Accordingly, a reasonable man, in this case a newspaper publisher, must be aware of the possibility of individuals with the same name and must assume that the words published will be read by a reasonable man with reasonable care.

  Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant.  TOLLEY  Vs,  J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement.   Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be aske
1 comment
Read more

Rules as to delivery of goods

                             Rules as to delivery of goods Section 2(2) of Sale of Goods Act defines ‘delivery’ as a ‘voluntary transfer of possession from one person to another.’ Thus, if the transfer of goods is not voluntary and is taken by theft, by fraud, or by force, then there is no ‘delivery. Moreover, the ‘delivery’ should have the effect of putting the goods in possession of the buyer. The essence of the delivery is a voluntary transfer of possession of goods from one person to another. There is no delivery of goods where they are obtained at pistol point or theft. 1. Mode of Delivery: According to Section 33, delivery of goods sold may be made by doing anything which the parties agree shall be treated as delivery or which has the effect of putting the goods in the possession of the buyer or of any person authorized to hold them on his behalf. Delivery of goods may be actual, symbolic or constructive. 2. Expenses of Delivery: According to Section 36(5), unless otherwise agree
Post a Comment
Read more