Disqualification of Sena UBT MPs for skipping party meet: Legal experts divided

New Delhi: The question of whether six Lok Sabha members of the Shiv Sena (Uddhav Balasaheb Thackeray) faction can be disqualified for skipping a party meeting has sparked debate among legal experts. The party, led by Uddhav Thackeray, has issued a whip to MPs Sanjay Jadhav, Bhausaheb Wakchaure, Omraje Nimbalkar, Sanjay Dina Patil, Sanjay Deshmukh, and Nagesh Patil Ashtikar, who have reportedly distanced themselves from the party. Rajya Sabha MP Sanjay Raut has argued that their absence amounts to disobeying the party's diktat, which is a ground for disqualification under the Tenth Schedule of the Constitution, commonly known as the anti-defection law.

However, legal experts have expressed differing views on whether the refusal to attend a party meeting constitutes a violation of the whip under the anti-defection provisions. Senior advocate and former law minister Kapil Sibal noted that a whip is primarily intended to direct a member's conduct within the House, such as voting on legislation. He stated that while failure to follow a whip during House proceedings can lead to disqualification, skipping a party meeting may not fall under the same category. Sibal, however, added that if members collectively skip meetings without justification, it could be seen as 'voluntarily giving up party membership,' which is a separate ground for disqualification under the Tenth Schedule.

In contrast, Supreme Court advocate Ajay Garg pointed out that the text of the Tenth Schedule explicitly ties disqualification to a member who 'votes or abstains from voting in such House' contrary to a party direction. He emphasised that the phrase 'in such House' imposes a strict geographical and functional limitation, meaning that a party meeting outside the House does not constitute the 'House' for the purposes of the anti-defection law. Therefore, he argued, non-attendance at an internal party meeting would not be a textual violation of the Tenth Schedule.

The decision on disqualification ultimately rests with the Speaker of the Lok Sabha, subject to judicial scrutiny. The differing expert opinions highlight the complexity of applying anti-defection rules to conduct outside the legislative chamber. The matter remains pending, with the party yet to formally move the Speaker for disqualification.