Suspended BJP MLAs: All further proceedings must be kept in abeyance, Delhi HC to Privileges Committee
The Delhi High Court has instructed the Delhi Assembly’s Privileges Committee to halt proceedings against seven BJP MLAs who were suspended for interrupting Lt Governor V.K. Saxena’s address at the commencement of the Budget session. The MLAs moved the high court, claiming their suspension was a ploy to silence opposition voices.
The seven BJP MLAs challenged their suspension, asserting that it was an attempt to prevent them from participating in discussions. They met the Assembly Speaker after Lt Governor accepted their apology, but the court has intervened, directing the Privileges Committee to halt proceedings as it hears the matter on merit.
The court observed that the suspended MLAs’ constituencies were going unrepresented in the House and adjourned the matter for hearing next on Friday. The MLAs have expressed concerns about their continued suspension and contested the politicized nature of the decision, indicating a potentially contentious environment.
According to senior advocate Jayant Mehta, the suspension is unconstitutional and contrary to rules, affecting their right to participate in proceedings. The plea argued that the suspension was engineered to silence opposition voices and was grossly unconstitutional and contrary to the Rules of Business of the House.
The motion to suspend the MLAs was initiated by AAP MLA Dilip Pandey in the House, which was accepted by the Speaker and forwarded to the Privileges Committee. The suspended MLAs, except Leader of Opposition Ramvir Singh Bidhuri, were barred from Assembly proceedings until the committee’s report was received.
The matter is set to be heard again, and the suspended MLAs continue to challenge their suspension, emphasizing the impact on their constituencies and the politicized nature of the decision. The court’s intervention has put the proceedings on hold, pending further examination of the matter.
The suspended MLAs are determined to fight the suspension, expressing their concerns about their right to participate in discussions and highlighting the potentially unconstitutional nature of the motion to suspend them. The situation remains tense as the court continues to deliberate on the matter.
