Anti-Defection Law Explained: The Tenth Schedule and the Speaker's Role in Disqualification

The Anti-Defection Law is contained in the Tenth Schedule of the Indian Constitution, added by the 52nd Amendment in 1985. Its purpose is to discourage elected members from switching parties for personal gain by allowing them to be disqualified from the legislature if they defect. The law applies to Members of Parliament as well as members of State legislatures, and recent disputes in different states have brought it back into focus as a concept to understand clearly.

Under the Tenth Schedule, a member can be disqualified mainly on two grounds. First, if the member voluntarily gives up membership of the party on whose ticket they were elected. Second, if the member votes or abstains in the House against the written direction, known as the whip, issued by the party, unless the party pardons the act within 15 days. To protect genuine realignments, the law allows an exception: there is no disqualification when one political party merges with another and at least two-thirds of the legislature party agree to that merger. An earlier exception for a one-third split was removed by the 91st Amendment in 2003, so a mere split no longer protects defectors.

The power to decide disqualification petitions rests with the presiding officer of the House, that is the Speaker of the Assembly or the Lok Sabha, or the Chairman in the upper House. The landmark judgment Kihoto Hollohan versus Zachillhu (1992) settled important points about this power. The Supreme Court held that the Speaker acts as a tribunal while deciding these cases, and so the decision is subject to judicial review by the courts. However, the Court also ruled that the courts cannot interfere before the Speaker gives a decision, except in cases of clear illegality such as bias or violation of constitutional principles.

Because the Speaker holds this discretionary power, fairness becomes central. The recent cases illustrate the range of outcomes. In one state, the Speaker decided not to pursue disqualification against a group of rebel legislators after the party leadership formally condoned their actions within the 15-day window allowed by the rules. In another situation involving Members of Parliament, experts stressed that simply seeking separate seating or claiming a bloc does not create a protected faction; the two-thirds merger condition applies to the political party as a whole, and members who voluntarily leave can be treated as defectors unless a valid merger occurs.

For an aspirant, the points to remember are: the Tenth Schedule was added by the 52nd Amendment (1985); the two grounds of disqualification; the two-thirds merger exception (with the split exception removed in 2003); the Speaker as the deciding authority; and the Kihoto Hollohan judgment making the Speaker's decision open to judicial review. This is a high-value, repeatedly asked topic in polity, and the focus should stay on the constitutional concept rather than any particular party dispute.