The Supreme Court asked the Secretary General of Lok Sabha to file a reply to the writ petition lodged by Trinamool Congress MP Mahua Moitra challenging her recent expulsion from the Lok Sabha over allegations of unethical conduct.
A division bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta stated that the reply has to be filed within three weeks and rejoinder by the petitioner, within three weeks thereafter. It also mentioned that one of the issues in the matter will be the jurisdiction of the court to review the Lok Sabha’s action.
In addition, the top court bench refused to grant any interim relief to Moitra, who was the MP from Krishnanagar constituency in West Bengal before her expulsion. Reportedly, the matter will be listed in the week commencing from March 11, 2024. The bench also turned down a prayer made by Senior Advocate Dr Abhishek Manu Singhvi on behalf of the petitioner to allow Moitra to attend Lok Sabha proceedings in the meantime as an interim measure.
Advocate Singhvi argued that the only concrete finding against Moitra in the ethics committee report was that she had unauthorisedly shared the login credentials of her MP portal with third parties. He further contended that there is no rule prohibiting the sharing of login credentials. He further asserted that it is a standard practice followed by many MPs, who delegate their work to secretaries and assistants to upload questions.
He also alleged violations of the principles of natural justice since Darshan Hiranandani, who filed an affidavit before the ethics committee making allegations against Mahua Moitra, was not allowed to be cross-examined. The senior advocate argued that the expulsion of opposition MPs on such flimsy grounds was a matter of grave constitutional importance.
Meanwhile, Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Lok Sabha Secretary General, submitted that the court cannot interfere with the internal functioning of the legislature. Mentioning that the court’s interference should be a violation of the doctrine of the separation of powers, Tushar Mehta stated that a sovereign organ of the State is deciding its internal discipline. He also questioned the scope of judicial review.