AMARINDER SINGH versus SPECIAL COMMITIEE, PUNJAB VIDHAN ,SABHA & OTHERS

Citation: [2010] 4 S.C.R. 1105 · Decided: 26-04-2010 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: K.G. BALAKRISHNAN · Disposal: Disposed off
Cited by 5 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

[2010] 4 S.C.R. 1105 
AMARINDER SINGH 
v. 
SPECIAL COMMITIEE, PUNJAB VIDHAN ,SABHA & 
OTHERS 
·.I 
(Civil Appeal No. 6053 of 2008)
1 
APRIL 26, 2010 
[K.G. BALAKRISHNAN, CJI, R.V. RAVEENDRAN, P. 
A 
1 
I 
B 
SATHASIVAM, J.M. PANCHAL, AND R.M. LODHA, JJ.] 
• 
Constitution of India, 1950: 
c 
I 
I 
Article 194(3) - Powers and privileges of House of 
Legislature - Expulsion of Me.mber of Vidhan Sabha for 
alleged improper exemption of land from acquisition scheme 
when he was Chief Minister during previous term of the House 
0 
- HELD: The allegedly improper exemption of land was an 
executive act and it did not distort, obstruct or threaten the 
integrity of the legislative proceedings in any manner - The 
Vidhan Sabha exceeded its powers by expelling the Member 
on the ground of a breach of privilege when there existed none 
E 
- Resolution passed by Punjab Vidhan Sabha on 10.9.2008 
directing expulsion of appellant for the remainder of 13th Term 
of Vidhan Sabha is declared invalid - Judicial review. 
Article 105(3) and 194(3) rlw Articles 122(1) and 212(1) 
- Expulsion of Member of Vidhan Sabha - Judicial review of F 
- HELD: Though Articles 122(1) and 212(1) make it clear that 
Courts cannot inquire into matters relating to irregularities in 
observance of procedure before Legislature, but Courts can 
examine whether proceedings conducted under Article 105(3) 
or Article 194(3) are 'tainted on account of substantive or G 
gross illegality or unconstitutionality' - In the instant case, the 
a/legations of wrong doing pertain to executive act given effect 
to in previous term of the House - Besides, there was no 
conceivable obstruction caused to the conduct of routine 
1105 
H 
1106 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2010] 4 S.C.R. 
A legislative business - Therefore, tne act of recommending the 
expulsion cannot be justified as a proper exercise of 'powers, 
privileges and immunities' conferred by Article 194(3) and is 
constitutionally invalid. 
8 
Article 194(3) - House of Legislature - Exercise of 
powers and privileges relating to acts done in previous term 
of the House -
Vidhan Sabha recommending expulsion of 
its member for alleged improper exemption of land from 
acquis,"tion scheme, when he was Chief Minister during the 
C previous term of the House - HELD: Ordinarily, legislative 
business does not survive the 'dissolution' of the House - In 
the instant case, the alleged improper exemption of land took 
place during the 12th Vidhan Sabha, and at the time of 
reconstitution of the 13th Vidhan Sabha, there was no pending 
motion, report or any other order of business which had a 
D connection with the alleged improper exemption of land - It 
was, therefore, not proper for the Assembly to inquire into 
actions that took place during its previous term - Doctrine of 
lapse. 
E 
Legislature: 
House of Legislature - Inquiring into sub-judice matter 
- HELD: Ordinarily, legislative proceedings should not touch 
on sub-judice matters -
In the instant case, improper 
c 
exemption of land had already been questioned and was 
pending before the High Court - Therefore, the Vidhan Sabha 
should have refrained from dealing with the same subject 
matter - Rules of Business and Conduct of the Punjab 
Vidhan Sabha - rr. 39(1), 50, 93(2)(iv) and 150(a) - Rules of 
Business and Conduct of the Lok Sabha - rr. 173, 188 and 
G 352 
Constitutionalism: 
Constitution of India - Separation of powers - House of 
H Legislature - Resolution containing directions as to how 
AMARINDER SINGH v. SPL. COMMITTEE, PUNJAB 1107 
VIDHAN SABHA 
investigation into the alleged wrong doings of a Member of A 
the fjouse, along with some others should be conducted as 
also certain directions tq Vigilance Department in that regard 
- HELD: These functions are within the domain of Executive, 
a'1d the Legislature would not assume the responsil;ility of 
monitoring an ongoing investigation - Further, a legislative 
B 
body is not entru,s~ed with the power of adjudicating a case 
once an appropfiate forum is in existence under the 
constitutional scµeme - There was an obvious jurisdictional 
error on the part of the Vidhan Sabha -
Doctrines -
E$eparation of/powers. 
c 
The appellant, who was the Chief Minister of the State 
dur.ing~~ 12th term of the Vidhan Sabha, was elected 
as a M mber of the House for its 13th term, which was 
cons ti uted on 1.3.2007, and became the leader of the 
opposition. A privilege motion was moved in the 13th 
Vidhan Sabha in respect
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.