Representative image

CHENNAI: Seven important political cases that have a bearing on the survival of the E Palaniswami government, including privilege notice to DMK MLAs, disqualification of 18 AIADMK MLAs owing allegiance to TTV Dhinakaran, and a case filed by DMK against the continuance of O Panneerselvam as deputy chief minister, will now go before a larger bench of the Madras high court.

The first case was filed by DMK working president MK Stalin on September 7 ques tioning the legality of the privilege notices to him and 20 other DMK MLAs for bringing banned gutka packets to the assembly. Now two months later, seven inter-related cases -which involve legal questions on the powers of the Tamil Nadu assembly and its speaker -have been referred to a larger bench by Justice K Ravichandra Baabu in view of the constitutional issues involved in the cases.

The cases carry immense political significance for the state and they are interrelated. Even a simple interim order could have a cascading effect on the political scenario in Tamil Nadu. For instance, the constitutional status of the 18 disqualified AIADMK MLAs still hangs in the balance, as the single judge had not passed any interim order in their favour except holding that no bypolls should be conducted for their assembly segments. Similarly, though the DMK has challenged the privilege notices issued to 21 of its MLAs, the bench had extracted an undertaking from the assembly secretary that nothing that would precipitate the issue would be done and that the floor test would not be held.

DMK has also raked up the issue of non-disqualification of Panneerselvam and11 other MLAs loyal to him, though they had defied the party whip and voted against the government. Their act has not yet been purged by the speaker, though as per rule it should be specifically pardoned within a timeframe.

Also, the Supreme Court has already seized PILs relating to the assembly speaker's power to initiate privilege proceedings or suspenddisqualify elected members.Considering all these complexities, a larger bench of the high court will be the right forum to handle the entire batch of seven cases.

On Thursday , Justice K Ravichandrabaabu recorded his view that it would be appropriate for a larger bench to hear such issues of constitutional importance and directed the court registry to place the matters before Chief Justice Indira Banerjee for constituting and referring them to a larger bench.

It all started with the DMK approaching the court assailing privilege notices issued to 21of its MLAs including opposition leader M K Stalin on August 28 for bringing banned gutka packets into the House on July 19.

Later, the DMK moved another plea seeking direction to the speaker to conduct a floor test in the assembly and make chief minister Edappadi K Palaniswami prove his majority in the House. This was followed by petitions moved by rebel AIADMK MLA Vetrivel and 17 others challenging their disqualification under the anti-defection act.

Chief whip of DMK R Sakkarapani moved another plea seeking direction to the speaker to disqualify deputy chief minister O Panneerselvam and 10 other MLAs who voted against the motion of confidence moved by Palaniswami on February 18.

Following the suit, Dhinakaran loyalist Vetrivel moved a similar plea seeking disqualification of Panneerselvam and the 10 MLAs.Amid the volley of petitions, the assembly secretary moved an application to vacate the stay passed by the single judge restraining the speaker from conducting a floor test till further orders.Lastly , DMK legislator K Pitchandi filed a quo warranto petition seeking direction to deputy chief minister Panneerselvam and minister K Pandiarajan to explain under what authority they hold their respective offices, on the ground that the duo were disqualified to be members of the legislative assembly as they voted against the confidence motion moved by Palaniswami.

