Anil Kumar Bajpai v. The Speaker, Legislative Assembly And ANR.

SN $-34 &

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DEI.HI

W.P.(C) 7272/2019 ANIL KUMAR BAJPAI Petitioner Through Mr Purushaindra Kaurav, Senior Advocate with Mr Neeraj, Mr Himanshu Pathak, Mr Satya Ranjan Swain, Ms Piyush Beriwal, Mr Sahaj Garg, Mr Sushil Kr Garg, Advocates, versus THE SPEAKER, LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY AND AMI.

Respondents Through Mr Manish Vashisht, Mr Sameer Vashisht, ASC, Civil, GNCTD with Mr Manashwy Jha, Ms Urvi Kapoor, Advocates for Rl.

Mr R.A. Iyer, Advocate for R2.

W.PTCI 7273/2019 + COL. DEVENDER KUMAR SEHRAWAT Petitioner Through Mr Chetan ShaiTna, Senior Advocate with Mr Neeraj, Mr Himanshu Pathak, Mr Satya Ranjan Swain, Ms Piyush Beriwal, Mr Sahaj Garg, Mr Sushil Kr Garg, Advocates versus THE SPEAKER, LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY AND ANR.

Respondents Through Mr Sudhir Nandrajog, Senior Advocate with Mr Sameer Vashisht, ASC, Civil, GNCTD with Mr Manashwy Jha, Ms Urvi Kapoor, Advocates for Rl.

Mr R.A. Iyer, Advocate for R2.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

ORDER

0/„ 08.07.2019 CM APPL. 30264/2019 in W.P.(C) 7272/2019 Certify that the digital and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing.

CM APPL. 30267/2019 in W.P.fO 7273/2019 1.

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

2.

The application are disposed of.

W.P.(a 7272/2019 & CM APPL. 30263/2019, 30265/2019 W.P.(a 7273/2019 & CM APPL. 30266/2019, 30300/2019 3.

The petitioners have filed the present petitions, inter alia, praying that directions be passed for removing respondent no.l from the anti-defeetion proceedings. The petitioners also pray that the respondent be directed to appoint a committee for the adjudication of the anti-defeetion proceedings initiated against the petitioners.

4.

The petitioners, essentially, seek to challenge the jurisdiction of respondent no.l. Speaker of the Delhi Legislative Assembly, to adjudicate the petition submitted by respondent no. 2, seeking their disqualification from the membership of the Legislative Assembly of NCT of Delhi. It is contended that respondent no.l is biased as he has a strong affiliation to the political party, Aam Aadmi Party, and, therefore, is not in a position to adjudicate the proceedings in an impartial and unbiased manner. The petitioners have raised a similar objection before respondent no.l. However, respondent no.l has called upon the petitioners to submit their responses on merits, as well.

5.

Mr Chetan Sharma, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners, contended that respondent no. 1 was bound to first adjudicate the objection of bias raised by the petitioners, before proceeding further. 6.

After the arguments were heard at length. Colonel Devender Kumar Sehrawat, the petitioner in W.P.(C) 7273/2019, also sought permission to

address arguments by discharging his Counsel. Although, this Court does not appreciate this conduct, nonetheless, this Court also heard Colonel Devender Kumar Sehrawat. He also reiterated the contention that respondent no. 1 is required to pass an order deciding the preliminary objection as to his jurisdiction to adjudicate the petition, before proceeding further. 7.

This Court finds the aforesaid contention bereft of any merit. There is no requirement for respondent no.l to decide the controversy piecemeal. This Court finds no fault in the procedure adopted by respondent no. 1 in calling upon the petitioners to file comprehensive responses to the petition submitted by respondent no.2.

8.

In view of the above, the present petitions are dismissed. Needless to state that respondent no. 1 would address all contentions as advanced by the petitioners. All rights and contentions of the petitioners to subsequently challenge any order that may be passed by respondent no. 1, are also reserved.

9.

All pending applications are also disposed of.

10. At this stage. Col Sehrawat requests that at least two days further time be granted to the petitioners to file a comprehensive response.

11. Mr Nandrajog, leamed Senior Counsel appearing for respondent no.l states that there would be no difficulty in acceding to the request made by the petitioners. The said statement is taken on record. VIBHUBAKHRU, J JULY 08, 2019 pkv