Read Time: 06 minutes

The Delhi High Court today directed the Secretariat, Lok Sabha to file "a well drafted affidavit explaining the correct constitutional propositions," on a plea against alleged inaction of the Speaker of the Lok Sabha at holding the election of the Deputy Speaker for a substantive period of 2 years.

The division bench of Chief Justice DN Patel and Justice Jyoti Singh has listed the matter for next hearing on Nov 29.

Sr. Adv. Rajshekhar Rao appearing for the Secretariat, Lok Sabha sought time to file a reply and submitted, "It is a decision made on the Floor of the house. This is not the first time that a Deputy Speaker has not been appointed, though this time for a longer period. But we will file a reply."

Chief Justice DN Patel accordingly granted time and said "Please file your reply. These types of issues are coming up again and again. We want to give guidance in accordance with constitutional provisions."

The petition filed by Adv. Pawan Reley says, “It is the first time in the history of Indian republic that the office of the Deputy speaker has been vacant for 830 days (2 Years, 3 months, 7 days) as of August 30, 2021, from the date of the Constitution of 17th Lok Sabha".

The petitioner has submitted that Article 93 of the Constitution of India read with Rule 8 of the Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business in Lok Sabha casts a mandatory constitutional obligation on the House of the People after the date fixed by the Speaker and after issuance of notice by the Secretary-General to elect the Deputy Speaker. “No discretion has been conferred on anybody not to elect the Deputy Speaker”, the petitioner submits.

It is submitted that the Deputy Speaker is not subordinate to the Speaker but holds an independent position and is answerable to the House alone.  

The petitioner has argued that Rule 8 of the Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business in Lok Sabha casts a primary duty on the Speaker to fix the date for holding the election of the Deputy Speaker.

“The expression “as soon as may be” under Article 93 cannot, at any stretch of imagination, be extended by the Respondents to the substantial period 2 years and more. Article 93 of the Constitution of India expressly does not put any rigid limitation in the election of the Speaker and Deputy Speaker by the House of the People”, the petitioner submits.

It has been submitted that any substantial delay in holding the election of the Deputy Speaker as mandated by Article 93 of the Constitution of India is violation of the constitutional mandate.

The petitioner has thus prayed for a direction to the respondents to  hold the election of the Deputy Speaker, Lok Sabha forthwith not beyond 1 month.

Case Title: Pawan Reley vs Speaker, Lok Sabha and Ors