Supreme Court Issues Notice to Rebel TMC MPs Amid Disqualification Plea

New Delhi, India Aug 26, 2026 ALN: New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday issued notice on a plea by Trinamool Congress (TMC) MP Abhishek Banerjee alleging delay by Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla in deciding his disqualification petitions against 20 rebel MPs who left the TMC and joined the Nationalist Citizens Party of India (NCPI). Hours later, the LS Speaker's secretariat issued notices to the 20 rebels.

A three-member bench, comprising Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana, issued notice to the rebel MPs and sought their responses but refrained from issuing notice to LS Speaker Om Birla. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing on behalf of the Central government, urged the Bench not to issue notice to the LS Speaker. "I have some reservations about issuing notice to the Speaker," Mehta said.

Justice Bagchi remarked, "We are not to pass any order against a constitutional authority, but to ensure that it is done in a timely manner. That is the most important." The Bench clarified that it is issuing notices to other respondents.

During the hearing, Mehta informed the SC that notices had been served to the 20 MPs. In the notice issued to all the 20 rebel TMC MPs separately, the Speaker's office sought their response to Banerjee's plea seeking their disqualification under the anti-defection law. They are to submit it within seven days of receiving the notice.

Banerjee had filed 20 separate petitions on June 18 this year against the 20 MPs seeking their disqualification under Rule 6 of the Members of Lok Sabha (Disqualification on ground of Defection) Rules, 1985.

The rebel MPs had merged with NCPI later and demanded recognition as a separate political entity from TMC. Before the Parliament session, the Speaker provided for a separate seating arrangement for the 20 rebel MPs. However, the Speaker's office has not yet recognised them as a parliamentary party.

The argument presented by the TMC in the petition before the Speaker is that these MPs have been elected on a TMC ticket and their decision to join another political party should be treated as voluntarily after giving up the membership from the party as well as the LS under Tenth Schedule of the Constitution.

The anti-defection law, encapsulated in the Tenth Schedule of the Indian Constitution, was enacted to prevent political defections prompted by the lure of office or other similar considerations. It stipulates that if an elected member of a party joins another party after the election, they shall be disqualified from being a member of the House. However, there are exceptions, such as if a member is elected as a speaker or if the original party merges with another party.

The implications of the Supreme Court's decision to issue notices are significant. It underscores the judiciary's role in adjudicating disputes related to political affiliations and the adherence to constitutional provisions. The court's insistence on a timely resolution is indicative of its recognition of the importance of stability in legislative bodies and the need to uphold democratic processes.

The rebel MPs' shift to the NCPI has raised questions about the stability of the TMC, which has been a dominant political force in West Bengal under the leadership of Mamata Banerjee. The TMC's response to this political upheaval is crucial as it seeks to maintain its majority in the Lok Sabha and its influence in state politics.

Furthermore, the Speaker's office's delay in recognizing the rebel MPs as a separate parliamentary entity may reflect the complexities involved in navigating the rules regarding party affiliation and disqualification. This situation highlights the ongoing tensions within Indian political parties, where internal dissent can lead to significant realignments and challenges.

As the situation unfolds, the responses from the rebel MPs and the subsequent actions by the Lok Sabha Speaker will be closely monitored. The outcome of this legal and political battle will not only affect the future of the TMC and its members but may also set precedents for how similar cases are handled in the future. Political analysts will be watching to see how this situation influences voter sentiment and party dynamics in the lead-up to future elections.

In conclusion, the Supreme Court's intervention in this matter reflects the judiciary's critical role in upholding constitutional norms and the rule of law in the political arena. The developments in this case will likely resonate beyond the immediate parties involved, impacting broader political discourse and party strategies in India.