REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

MANDADI SATYANARAYANA REDDY Appellant

V/S

ANDHRA PRADESH LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

JAGJIT SINGH V. STATE OF HARYANA [REFERRED TO]
J K COTTON SPINNING AND WEAVING VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
CALCUTTA GAS COMPANY PROPRIETARY LIMITED VS. STATE OF WEST BENGAL [REFERRED TO]
SHYAM KISHORI DEVI VS. PATNA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION [REFERRED TO]
SAMANT N BALKRISHNA VS. GEORGE FERNANDEZ [REFERRED TO]
JYOTI BASU VS. DEBI GHOSAL [REFERRED TO]
A R ANTULAY VS. RAMDAS SRINIWAS NAYAK [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF KERALA VS. MATHAI VERGHESE [REFERRED TO]
LAXMI RAJ SHETTY VS. STATE OF TAMIL NADU [REFERRED TO]
GWALIOR RATON SILK MANUFACTURING WEAVING CO LIMITED VS. CUSTODIAN OF VESTED FORESTS PALGHAT [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. DEOKI NANDAN AGGARWAL [REFERRED TO]
KIHOTO HOLLOHAN VS. ZACHILLHU [REFERRED TO]
RAVI S NAIK SANJAY BANDEKAR VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
JANATA DAL SAMAJWADI VS. ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
G VISWANATHAN AZHAGU THIRUNAVUKKARASU VS. HONBLE SPEAKER TAMIL NADU LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY MADRAS ANOTHER:HONBLE SPEAKER TAMIL NADU LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY MADRAS ANOTHER [REFERRED TO]
SULTANA BEGUM VS. PREM CHAND JAIN [REFERRED TO]
KRISHNA MOHINI VS. MOHINDER NATH SOFAT [REFERRED TO]
MARUTI WIRE INDUSTRIES PVT LIMITED VS. S T O 1ST CIRCLE MATTANCHERRY [REFERRED TO]
DENTAL COUNCIL OF INDIA VS. HARI PRAKASH [REFERRED TO]
ANWAR HASAN KHAN VS. MOHAMMAD SHAFI [REFERRED TO]
J P BANSAL VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [REFERRED TO]
DELHI FINANCIAL CORPN VS. RAJIV ANAND [REFERRED TO]
MAHACHANDRA PRASAD SINGH VS. CHAIRMAN BIHAR LEGIS COUNCIL [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF JHARKHAND VS. GOVIND SINGH [REFERRED TO]
P RAGHAVA KURUP VS. V ANANTHAKUMARI [REFERRED TO]
GUJARAT URJA VIKASH NIGAM LTD VS. ESSAR POWER LTD [REFERRED TO]
DASYAM VINAYA BHANSKAR VS. DHARMA RAO MARTHINENI [REFERRED TO]
T BASAVARAJU VS. T NAGARATNAM [REFERRED TO]
T ARTHI VS. K ANAND REDDY [REFERRED TO]
YARIAGADDA VENKATESWARA RAO VS. GOVERNMENT OF ANSHRA PRADESH [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) "the evil of political defections has been a matter of national concern. If it is not combated, it is likely to undermine the very foundations of our democracy and the principles which sustain it. With this object, an assurance was given in the Address by the President to Parliament that the government intended to introduce in the current session of Parliament an anti-defection Bill. This Bill is meant for outlawing defection and fulfilling the above assurance. "

(2.) UNPRINCIPLED defection is a political and social evil. People have grown distrustful of the emotive political exultations that such floor-crossings belong to the sacred area of freedom of conscience, or of the right to dissent or of intellectual freedom. The antidefection law seeks to recognise the practical need to place the proprieties of political and personal conduct-whose awkward erosion and grotesque manifestations have been the bane of the times - above certain theoretical assumptions which in reality have fallen into a morass of personal and political degradation. (Kihoto Hollohan v. Zachillhu ).

(3.) AGGRIEVED by the order of the Speaker of the Andhra Pradesh State Legislative assembly, in Disqualification Petition No. 1 of 2007 dated 22. 12. 2008, declaring that they were disqualified from continuing as members of the 12th Legislative Assembly under para 2 (1) (a) of the tenth schedule, and that their seats had fallen vacant, respondents 3 and 6 therein have filed these two writ petitions. A writ of Certiorari is sought to quash the said order and to declare that they continue to be members of the Andhra pradesh Legislative Assembly. The 2nd respondent in these two writ petitions was the petitioner in D. P. No. 1 of 2007. Parties shall, hereinafter, be referred to as they are arrayed in D. P. No. 1 of 2007.

Click here to view full judgment.

MANDADI SATYANARAYANA REDDY Vs. ANDHRA PRADESH LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address