Background
This landmark case challenged the constitutional validity of the Tenth Schedule (Anti-Defection Law) introduced by the 52nd Amendment.
Key Issues
- Whether vesting decision-making power in the Speaker/Chairman violates basic structure
- Scope and applicability of the anti-defection law
- Whether such decisions are subject to judicial review
Judgment
The Supreme Court upheld the constitutional validity of the Tenth Schedule, with certain limitations.
Key Observations
- Tenth Schedule is constitutionally valid
It is essential to curb political defections and ensure stability. - Judicial review allowed
Decisions of the Speaker are subject to review on grounds of mala fide, perversity, or violation of constitutional principles. - Scope limited to House proceedings
Anti-defection applies only to:- Voting inside the legislature
- Actions related to legislative functioning
- It does not extend to electoral processes outside the House, such as Rajya Sabha elections
Significance
- Landmark ruling defining the scope and limits of anti-defection law
- Balanced legislative autonomy with judicial oversight
Clarified that party discipline applies primarily to legislative voting, not all political actions
