Applications for the LAMP Fellowship 2025-26 will open soon. Sign up here to be notified when the dates are announced.
The President addressed the Parliament after the 2009 Lok Sabha Elections on 4th June 2009. She also addressed Parliament on 22nd February 2010, as well as on 21st February 2011. The tables below highlight some items from the agenda of the central government as outlined in these speeches, as well as the initiatives undertaken with respect to these agenda items. Table 1: Some Items from the President’s Address to Parliament on 4th June 2009
| Agenda Items outlined in the President’s Speech | Current Status |
| Establishment of National Counter-Terrorism Centre | Proposed launch of NCTC in March 2011 on hold |
| Enactment of legislation for prevention of communal violence | Communal Violence Bill 2005 pending in Parliament. New bill drafted by NAC but not introduced in Parliament |
| Unique Identity Card scheme to be implemented in three years | Unique Identification Authority of India created under Planning Commission on 28 January 2009. Bill to give statutory status pending in Parliament |
| Establishment of a regulator for the pension sector | Bill introduced in Lok Sabha on 24 March 2011 |
| Convergence of NREGA with other programs; expansion of works permitted; independent monitoring and grievance redressal | |
| Rashtriya Swasthya Bima Yojana to cover all families below the poverty line in five years | |
| Enactment of Right to Free and Compulsory Education Bill | Bill passed in 2009 and brought into force on 1 April 2009 |
| Madhyamik Shiksha Abhiyan to universalize access to secondary education | Rashtriya Madhyamik Shiksha Abhiyan launched in March 2009 |
| National Mission for Female Literacy to make every woman literate in five years | National Literacy Mission recast in 2009 to focus on female literacy |
| Construction of 1.2 crore rural houses under Indira Awas Yojana in five years | |
| Introduction of Rajiv Awas Yojana for slum dwellers and urban poor | Phase I approved by Cabinet on 2 June 2011 |
| Enactment of National Food Security Act | Introduced in Lok Sabha on 22 December 2011 |
| Enactment of Amendment Bill to Land Acquisition Act and Rehabilitation and Resettlement Bill | Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Bill 2011 introduced in Lok Sabha on 7 September 2011 |
| Enactment of Women’s Reservation Bill | Passed by Rajya Sabha, pending in Lok Sabha |
| Constitutional Amendment for 50 percent reservation for women in panchayats and urban local bodies | Two Bills introduced in Lok Sabha in November 2009; both pending in Parliament |
| Amendment of RTI to provide for disclosure by government in all non-strategic areas | |
| Model Public Services Law to be drawn up in consultation with states | Right of Citizens for Time Bound Delivery of Goods and Services and Redressal of their Grievance Bill, 2011 introduced in Lok Sabha on 20 December 2011 |
| Introduction of Goods and Services Tax | Constitutional Amendment Bill introduced in Lok Sabha on 22 March 2011 |
| National Council for Human Resources in Health | Introduced in Rajya Sabha on 22 December 2011 |
| National Council for Higher Education | Bill introduced in Rajya Sabha on 28 December 2011 |
*Note: Blank cells indicate that PRS has not been able to find official information in the public domain. Table 2: Some Items from the President’s speech to Parliament on 22nd February 2010
| Agenda Items outlined in the President’s Speech | Current Status |
| Introduction of legislation to ensure food security | Introduced in Lok Sabha on 22 December 2011 |
| Rural teledensity of 40 percent by 2014 | Rural teledensity of 33% as of February 2011 |
| Introduction of Rajiv Awas Yojana for urban poor and slum dwellers | Phase I approved by Cabinet on 2 June 2011 |
| Disposal of remaining claims under the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers Act | |
| Introduction of amendment to the Wakf Act | Passed by Lok Sabha; pending in Rajya Sabha |
| Enactment of Communal Violence (Prevention, Control and Rehabilitation of Victims) Bill, 2005 | Pending in Rajya Sabha since 2005 |
| Enactment of Women’s Reservation Bill | Passed by Rajya Sabha; pending in Lok Sabha |
| Constitutional amendments for 50 percent reservation for women in panchayats and urban local bodies | Two Bills introduced in Lok Sabha in November 2009; both pending in Parliament |
| Establishment of National Council for Higher Education and Research | Higher Education and Research Bill, 2011 introduced in Rajya Sabha on 28 December 2011 |
| Legislation for facilitating participation of foreign academic institutions in the education sector | Foreign Educational Institutions Bill, 2010 introduced in Lok Sabha on 3 May 2010 |
| Voting rights for Indian citizens living abroad | Bill passed. NRIs can vote at the place of residence that is mentioned in their passport |
Table 3: Some Items from the President’s speech to Parliament on 21st February 2011
| Agenda Items outlined in the President’s Speech | Current Status |
| Enactment of Food Security Law | Introduced in Lok Sabha on 22 December 2011 |
| Whistleblower Bill | Bill passed by Lok Sabha; pending in Rajya Sabha |
| Enactment of Judicial Standards and Accountability Bill | Introduced in Lok Sabha on 1 December 2010 |
| Enactment of new Mines and Minerals Bill | Introduced in Lok Sabha on 12 December 2011 |
| Rural teledensity of 40 percent by 2014 | Rural teledensity of 33% as of February 2011 |
| Construction of 1.2 crore rural houses during 2009-14 | |
| Enactment of Women’s Reservation Bill | Passed by Rajya Sabha; pending in Lok Sabha |
| Introduction of Bill regarding protection of children from sexual offences | Introduced in Rajya Sabha on 23 March 2011 |
| Introduction of Biotechnology Regulatory Authority of India Bill | Not introduced till date |
On Monday, December 4, the Chairman of Rajya Sabha disqualified two Members of Parliament (MPs) from the House under the Tenth Schedule of the Constitution (better known as the anti-defection law) for having defected from their party.[1] These members were elected on a Janata Dal (United) ticket. The Madras High Court is also hearing petitions filed by 18 MLAs who were disqualified by the Speaker of the Tamil Nadu Assembly in September 2017 under the anti-defection law. Allegations of legislators defecting in violation of the law have been made in several other states including Andhra Pradesh, Arunachal Pradesh, Goa, Manipur, Nagaland, Telangana and Uttarakhand in recent years.[2] In this context, we explain the anti-defection law.
What is the anti-defection law?
Aaya Ram Gaya Ram was a phrase that became popular in Indian politics after a Haryana MLA Gaya Lal changed his party thrice within the same day in 1967. The anti-defection law sought to prevent such political defections which may be due to reward of office or other similar considerations.[3]
The Tenth Schedule was inserted in the Constitution in 1985. It lays down the process by which legislators may be disqualified on grounds of defection by the Presiding Officer of a legislature based on a petition by any other member of the House. A legislator is deemed to have defected if he either voluntarily gives up the membership of his party or disobeys the directives of the party leadership on a vote. This implies that a legislator defying (abstaining or voting against) the party whip on any issue can lose his membership of the House. The law applies to both Parliament and state assemblies.
Are there any exceptions under the law?
Yes, legislators may change their party without the risk of disqualification in certain circumstances. The law allows a party to merge with or into another party provided that at least two-thirds of its legislators are in favour of the merger. In such a scenario, neither the members who decide to merge, nor the ones who stay with the original party will face disqualification.
Various expert committees have recommended that rather than the Presiding Officer, the decision to disqualify a member should be made by the President (in case of MPs) or the Governor (in case of MLAs) on the advice of the Election Commission.[4] This would be similar to the process followed for disqualification in case the person holds an office of profit (i.e. the person holds an office under the central or state government which carries a remuneration, and has not been excluded in a list made by the legislature).
How has the law been interpreted by the Courts while deciding on related matters?
The Supreme Court has interpreted different provisions of the law. We discuss some of these below.
The phrase ‘Voluntarily gives up his membership’ has a wider connotation than resignation
The law provides for a member to be disqualified if he ‘voluntarily gives up his membership’. However, the Supreme Court has interpreted that in the absence of a formal resignation by the member, the giving up of membership can be inferred by his conduct.[5] In other judgments, members who have publicly expressed opposition to their party or support for another party were deemed to have resigned.[6]
In the case of the two JD(U) MPs who were disqualified from Rajya Sabha on Monday, they were deemed to have ‘voluntarily given up their membership’ by engaging in anti-party activities which included criticizing the party on public forums on multiple occasions, and attending rallies organised by opposition parties in Bihar.[7]
Decision of the Presiding Officer is subject to judicial review
The law initially stated that the decision of the Presiding Officer is not subject to judicial review. This condition was struck down by the Supreme Court in 1992, thereby allowing appeals against the Presiding Officer’s decision in the High Court and Supreme Court.[8] However, it held that there may not be any judicial intervention until the Presiding Officer gives his order.
In 2015, the Hyderabad High Court, refused to intervene after hearing a petition which alleged that there had been delay by the Telangana Assembly Speaker in acting against a member under the anti-defection law.[9]
Is there a time limit within which the Presiding Officer has to decide?
The law does not specify a time-period for the Presiding Officer to decide on a disqualification plea. Given that courts can intervene only after the Presiding Officer has decided on the matter, the petitioner seeking disqualification has no option but to wait for this decision to be made.
There have been several cases where the Courts have expressed concern about the unnecessary delay in deciding such petitions.[10] In some cases this delay in decision making has resulted in members, who have defected from their parties, continuing to be members of the House. There have also been instances where opposition members have been appointed ministers in the government while still retaining the membership of their original parties in the legislature.[11]
In recent years, opposition MLAs in some states, such as Andhra Pradesh and Telangana, have broken away in small groups gradually to join the ruling party. In some of these cases, more than 2/3rd of the opposition has defected to the ruling party.
In these scenarios, the MLAs were subject to disqualification while defecting to the ruling party in smaller groups. However, it is not clear if they will still face disqualification if the Presiding Officer makes a decision after more than 2/3rd of the opposition has defected to the ruling party. The Telangana Speaker in March 2016 allowed the merger of the TDP Legislature Party in Telangana with the ruling TRS, citing that in total, 80% of the TDP MLAs (12 out of 15) had joined the TRS at the time of taking the decision.[12]
In Andhra Pradesh, legislators of the main opposition party recently boycotted the entire 12-day assembly session. This boycott was in protest against the delay of over 18 months in action being taken against legislators of their party who have allegedly defected to the ruling party.[13] The Vice President, in his recent order disqualifying two JD(U) members stated that all such petitions should be decided by the Presiding Officers within a period of around three months.
Does the anti-defection law affect the ability of legislators to make decisions?
The anti-defection law seeks to provide a stable government by ensuring the legislators do not switch sides. However, this law also restricts a legislator from voting in line with his conscience, judgement and interests of his electorate. Such a situation impedes the oversight function of the legislature over the government, by ensuring that members vote based on the decisions taken by the party leadership, and not what their constituents would like them to vote for.
Political parties issue a direction to MPs on how to vote on most issues, irrespective of the nature of the issue. Several experts have suggested that the law should be valid only for those votes that determine the stability of the government (passage of the annual budget or no-confidence motions).[14]
————————————————————
[1] Parliamentary Bulletin-II, December 4, 2017, http://164.100.47.5/newsite/bulletin2/Bull_No.aspx?number=57066 and http://164.100.47.5/newsite/bulletin2/Bull_No.aspx?number=57067.
[2] MLA Defection Politics Not New, Firstpost, March 13, 2017, http://www.firstpost.com/politics/bjp-forms-govt-in-goa-manipur-mla-defection-politics-not-new-telangana-ap-perfected-it-3331872.html.
[3] The Constitution (52nd Amendment) Act, 1985, http://indiacode.nic.in/coiweb/amend/amend52.htm.
[4] Report of the Committee on Electoral Reforms, 1990, http://lawmin.nic.in/ld/erreports/Dinesh%20Goswami%20Report%20on%20Electoral%20Reforms.pdfand the National Commission to review the working of the Constitution (NCRWC), 2002, http://lawmin.nic.in/ncrwc/ncrwcreport.htm.
[5] Ravi Naik vs Union of India, 1994, https://indiankanoon.org/doc/554446/.
[6] G.Viswanathan Vs. The Hon’ble Speaker, Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly, Madras& Another, 1996, https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1093980/ and Rajendra Singh Rana vs. Swami Prasad Maurya and Others, 2007, https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1620629/ and Parliamentary Bulletin-II, December 4, 2017, http://164.100.47.5/newsite/bulletin2/Bull_No.aspx?number=57066.
[7] Parliamentary Bulletin-II, December 4, 2017, http://164.100.47.5/newsite/bulletin2/Bull_No.aspx?number=57066.
[8] Kihoto Hollohon vs. Zachilhu and Others, 1992, https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1686885/.
[9] Sabotage of Anti-Defection Law in Telangana, 2015, https://www.epw.in/journal/2015/50/commentary/sabotage-anti-defection-law-telangana.html.
[10] Speaker, Haryana Vidhan Sabha Vs Kuldeep Bishnoi & Ors., 2012, https://indiankanoon.org/doc/45034065/ and Mayawati Vs Markandeya Chand & Ors., 1998, https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1801522/.
[11] Anti-Defecton Law Ignored, November 30, 2017, http://www.news18.com/news/politics/anti-defection-law-ignored-as-mlas-defect-to-tdp-trs-in-andhra-pradesh-and-telangana-1591319.htmland It’s official Minister Talasani is still a TDP Member, March 27, 2015, http://www.thehansindia.com/posts/index/Telangana/2015-03-27/Its-Official-Minister-Talasani-is-still-a-TDP-member/140135.
[12] Telangana Legislative Assembly Bulletin, March 10, 2016, http://www.telanganalegislature.org.in/documents/10656/19317/Assembly+Buletin.PDF/a0d4bb52-9acf-494f-80e7-3a16e3480460; 12 TDP MLAs merged with TRS, March 11, 2016, http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/telangana/12-tdp-mlas-merged-with-trs/article8341018.ece.
[13] The line TD leaders dare not cross, December 4, http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/tp-andhrapradesh/the-line-td-leaders-dare-not-cross/article21257521.ece
[14] Report of the National Commission to review the working of the Constitution, 2002, http://lawmin.nic.in/ncrwc/ncrwcreport.htm, Report of the Committee on electoral reforms, 1990, http://lawmin.nic.in/ld/erreports/Dinesh%20Goswami%20Report%20on%20Electoral%20Reforms.pdf and Law Commission (170th report), 1999, http://www.lawcommissionofindia.nic.in/lc170.htm.
