Polity and Governance › Parliament and state legislatures

Presiding officers, privileges and anti defection

The officers who run each House, the privileges of members, and the anti defection law of the Tenth Schedule with the Speaker as its judge.

All 1 article shown; the 1 that changed from 1 to 30 September 2026 are marked.Show only these

The anti defection law

Prelims and Mains

LeadThe anti defection law: condonation, mergers and the SpeakerSeptember 2026

Why in news

On 24 September 2026 the Supreme Court upheld the disqualification of a Telangana legislator who had fought a Lok Sabha election on another party's ticket. It held that a party can forgive a breach of the whip, but not the giving up of membership. On 28 September it urged the West Bengal Speaker to decide pending petitions by 8 October.

Background

The Tenth Schedule was added by the 52nd Amendment (1985) to stop legislators changing parties for office or money.
A member is disqualified for voluntarily giving up party membership, or for voting or abstaining against the party's direction.
The presiding officer of the House decides. There is no time limit in the text.
The 91st Amendment (2003) removed the protection for a split by one third of a party. A merger by two thirds of the legislature party is still protected.

What the Court settled in September

The Speaker had rejected the petitions against him, and the High Court set that rejection aside.
The Court held that condonation within 15 days applies only to a breach of the whip. Giving up membership cannot be condoned.

This builds on the settled rule that conduct is enough (Ravi Naik, 1994): a formal resignation is not needed to show that membership has been given up.

The Speaker's delay

Speakers often sit on petitions until the term of the House is nearly over.
The Court has suggested three months as a reasonable time, but in the West Bengal case it only urged, and did not order, a decision.
The Speaker usually belongs to the ruling party, which is why the neutrality of the office is doubted.

Mergers and the "real party"

Paragraph 4 protects a merger if two thirds of the legislature party agree.
Factions use this to claim that they are the party itself, and the Election Commission then decides who gets the name and symbol under the Symbols Order, 1968.
The Shiv Sena case, heard in September, asks how much weight the Commission should give to legislators as against the party organisation.

Does the law work?

It ended the retail defections of the 1960s and 1970s.

It did not stop wholesale defections, and it punishes honest dissent: a member cannot vote against the party even on conscience.
It weakens the legislature's check on the executive, since the whip decides every vote.

Cases to cite

Kihoto Hollohan v. Zachillhu (1992): upheld the Tenth Schedule; the Speaker acts as a tribunal and the decision is open to judicial review.
Ravi S. Naik v. Union of India (1994): giving up membership can be inferred from conduct.
Rajendra Singh Rana v. Swami Prasad Maurya (2007): the Court may itself decide where the Speaker fails to.
Keisham Meghachandra Singh v. Speaker, Manipur (2020): petitions should be decided within three months; Parliament should consider an independent tribunal.
Subhash Desai v. Principal Secretary, Governor of Maharashtra (2023): the whip is appointed by the political party, not the legislature party.

The way forward

Move the decision to the President or Governor on the advice of the Election Commission, as the Dinesh Goswami Committee proposed, or to an independent tribunal, as the Court suggested in 2020.
Fix a time limit in the Schedule itself.
Limit the whip to votes on which the government's survival depends, such as confidence motions, so that members can otherwise vote freely.
Define a merger as one of the original political party, and not only of its legislators.

Prelims facts

Tenth Schedule: 52nd Amendment, 1985; split provision deleted by the 91st Amendment, 2003.
An independent member is disqualified on joining any party; a nominated member on joining a party after six months.
A merger needs two thirds of the legislature party.
The 91st Amendment also limits the Council of Ministers to 15 per cent of the strength of the lower House.
The presiding officer's decision is subject to judicial review.

Open the lead on its own page

The Tenth Schedule was added by the 52nd Amendment (1985) to stop legislators changing parties for office or money.

What changed

24 Sep 2026LeadThe anti defection law: condonation, mergers and the Speaker