Supreme Court cancels nomination of two Telangana MLCs under Governor's quota

The Supreme Court today has quashed the nominations of M Kodandaram and Ameer Ali Khan as Members of the Legislative Council (MLCs) in Telangana, acting on a petition filed by Sravan Dasoju and K Satyanarayana.

In July 2023, the Bharat Rashtra Samithi (BRS) government in Telangana had recommended the names of Dasoju Sravan Kumar and Kurra Satyanarayana for the two MLC seats under the governor’s quota. The then-governor, Dr Tamilisai Soundararajan, rejected their nominations in September 2023.

Dasoju and K Satyanarayana challenged the governor’s rejection in the Telangana High Court. After the BRS government lost the Assembly elections, and Congress came to power in January 2024, it recommended new names for the two MLC seats of Kodandaram and Amer Ali Khan.

Telangana High Court, in a significant ruling, nullified the decisions made by Governor Tamilisai Soundararajan regarding the nominations to the Telangana State Legislative Council, holding that “the Governor while exercising powers under Article 171(5) of the Constitution of India is bound by the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers and has no discretion".

High Court invalidated both the impugned orders by Governor Soundararajan and overturned the Governor's rejection of nominations for Bharat Rashtra Samithi (BRS) leaders Sravan Dasoju and K Satyanarayana and the subsequent nominations of M Kodandaram and Amer Ali Khan under the Governor's quota.

The nominated MLCs, Kodandaram and Khan, appealed the High Court’s decision to the Supreme Court. Last year the Supreme Court had Supreme Court stayed the High Court’s judgment allowing them to be sworn in as MLC, subject to the outcome of the appeal. Today Supreme Court has cancelled the nominations of Kodandaram and Khan. 

Supreme Court will now deliver its final judgment on the issue on September 17.

The High Court had held that, “The Governor is not answerable to the court due to Article 361 of the Constitution of India. No positive direction can be issued to the Governor. However, in these cases, this court hopes and trusts that suitable action in accordance with the Constitution's provisions will be taken,” indicating a respectful deference to the constitutional immunity granted to the Governor's office while emphasising the expectation of adherence to constitutional norms.

Referring to the principle derived from the Nabam Rebia vs. Deputy Speaker judgment, which specifies that a Governor's discretionary powers are limited, the high court had ruled that a Governor must act on the Council of Ministers' advice unless the Constitution expressly allows discretion or the interpretation of a provision permits it.

In conclusion, the high court held that the nominations of the petitioners for the Legislative Council were not rejected due to any disqualification under Article 191, ineligibility under the Representation of People Act, 1951, or other reasons and the rejection was mainly because the nominations lacked detailed documentation and there was no disclosed methodology for the consideration process.

Additionally, there were no intelligence or agency reports suggesting any disqualifications of the petitioners under the Representation of People Act, 1951, nor was there any documentation supporting the criteria fulfilment for nomination as required by Article 171(5) of the Constitution of India, the high court had further found.

Despite these findings, the Governor rejected the petitioners' nominations without any substantial material justifying such rejections. In such a scenario, the Governor should have returned the matter to the Cabinet for further documentation or reconsideration, the court had observed.

Case Title: YADAVALLI SIVA PRASAD vs. THE STATE OF TELANGANA

Hearing Date: August 13, 2025

Bench: Justices Dipankar Datta and AG Masih