HC seeks Speaker’s response over former MLA Kartar Singh Tanwar’s disqualification

New Delhi [India], October 18 (ANI): The Delhi High Court on Friday issued notice on the plea moved by former AAP MLA Kartar Singh Tanwar. He has challenged his disqualification from the Delhi Legislative Assembly.

Justice Sanjeev Narula issued notice and sought a response from the Speaker of the Delhi Legislative Assembly and Dilip Kumar Pandey. The next date of hearing is December 9.

Senior advocate Jayant Mehta alongwith Satya Ranjan Swain appeared for Kartar Singh Tanwar.

Former AAP MLA Kartar Singh Tanwar has challenged his disqualification from the Delhi Legislative Assembly by the Speaker. He was disqualified on September 24 by the speaker.

Tanwar has challenged the order of 24.09.2024 by the Speaker disqualifying him. He has sought a direction to set aside the order.

The petition has been moved through Advocates Neeraj and Satya Ranjan Swain.

It is stated by the petitioner that the disqualification order was passed in haste without affording an opportunity for a personal hearing to the Petitioner. Besides, the Order is cryptic and non-speaking.

The petitioner has sought to set aside the disqualification order of 24.09.2024 passed by the Speaker disqualifying Tanwar from the Membership of the Delhi Legislative Assembly.

Kartar Singh Tanwar was a Member of the Legislative Assembly (MLA) of NCT of Delhi, and he contested the General election to the Legislative Assembly of NCT of Delhi, held on 08.02.2020, in the symbol of the Aam Aadmi Party.

The Petitioner was an MLA for the second term and he represented the Chhatarpur constituency. On 12.02.2020, being elected, the Petitioner took oath on 24.02.2020, as a member of the Legislative Assembly of the NCT of Delhi.

The petition stated that the Speaker Delhi Assembly after taking cognisance of the disqualification Petition filed by Respondent Dilip Kumar Pandey issued a notice on 07.08.2024

and the Petitioner was directed to submit his comments on the petition on or before 05:00 PM of 19.08.2024.

It was alleged that Tanwar joined the BJP without resigning from AAP. Many newspapers in July 2024 reported that Tanwar had joined the BJP.

The Speaker had also directed that this matter would be taken up on 21.08.2024 at 03:00 PM in the Office of Hon’ble Speaker of the Legislative Assembly and a personal hearing would be afforded to the Petitioner, the plea stated.

It is stated that the speaker issued a notice on 16.08.2024 to the Petitioner and the personal hearing of the Petitioner was postponed till further communication and he was directed to appear for a personal hearing on 21.08.2024.

The Petitioner in its reply dated 03.09.2024 denied all the allegations leveled upon him as they were false, incorrect and farther from truth, it added.

It is further stated that the Petitioner was thereafter again issued a notice dated 17.09.2024 and he was directed to appear in person on 20.09.2024 at 04:30 PM in the office of the Speaker, Legislative Assembly, Delhi and justify his stand.

The Petitioner by way of his letter of 20.09.2024 wrote to the Deputy Secretary, Legislation requesting him to adjourn the matter and list it after two weeks as he has been hospitalized and is suffering from low blood pressure, the plea said.

The petitioner has claimed that the doctors have advised him not to undertake any kind of physical activity. The speaker failed to consider the request of the Petitioner and through a letter dated 20.09.2024 directed him to appear on 24.09.2024 despite being aware of the fact that he is under severe medication.

The Petitioner stated that he immediately wrote to him that though he had been discharged from the hospital to attend the personal hearing but the doctors have advised him not to

indulge in any physical work as the same may lead to exhaustion and undue stress.

It is stated that the Petitioner had also enclosed the medical prescription issued by the Max hospital and sought further indulgence of at least two weeks to appear before the Speaker. The speaker failed to consider the plight of the Petitioner and passed the impugned order dated 24.09.2024 disqualifying the Petitioner.