UPSC Prelims Practice Questions — SC gives Telangana Speaker 3 weeks to rule on defections
Q1. With reference to Supreme Court directions on the time-frame within which a Presiding Officer must decide anti-defection petitions, consider the following statements: 1. In Keisham Meghachandra Singh v. Hon'ble Speaker, Manipur Legislative Assembly (2020), the Supreme Court indicated three months as the ordinarily reasonable outer limit for deciding such petitions. 2. In Padi Kaushik Reddy v. State of Telangana (July 2025), the Supreme Court directed the Telangana Speaker to decide all the BRS disqualification petitions within three months. 3. On 7 February 2026, the Supreme Court for the first time invoked its contempt jurisdiction against the Telangana Speaker and removed him from office. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
- In Keisham Meghachandra Singh v. Hon'ble Speaker, Manipur Legislative Assembly (2020), the Supreme Court indicated three months as the ordinarily reasonable outer limit for deciding such petitions.
- In Padi Kaushik Reddy v. State of Telangana (July 2025), the Supreme Court directed the Telangana Speaker to decide all the BRS disqualification petitions within three months.
- On 7 February 2026, the Supreme Court for the first time invoked its contempt jurisdiction against the Telangana Speaker and removed him from office.
- A. 1 and 2 only
- B. 1 only
- C. 2 and 3 only
- D. 1, 2 and 3
Q2. Which one of the following judgments is regarded as the principal precedent that established that the Speaker's order on disqualification under the Tenth Schedule is subject to judicial review by constitutional courts?
- A. Raja Ram Pal v. Hon'ble Speaker, Lok Sabha (2007)
- B. Kihoto Hollohan v. Zachillhu (1992)
- C. Nabam Rebia v. Deputy Speaker (2016)
- D. Keisham Meghachandra Singh v. Speaker, Manipur Legislative Assembly (2020)
Q3. With reference to the Tenth Schedule of the Constitution of India, which of the following are correctly identified as its features as interpreted by the Supreme Court? 1. Voluntarily giving up membership of one's political party is a ground for disqualification of a legislator. 2. Voting or abstaining from voting contrary to a direction issued by the political party's whip, without prior permission, is a ground for disqualification. 3. The Speaker or Chairman of the House decides disqualification petitions as a quasi-judicial tribunal. 4. The Speaker's order on disqualification is final and is expressly barred from judicial review by any court. Which of the above is/are correctly identified?
- Voluntarily giving up membership of one's political party is a ground for disqualification of a legislator.
- Voting or abstaining from voting contrary to a direction issued by the political party's whip, without prior permission, is a ground for disqualification.
- The Speaker or Chairman of the House decides disqualification petitions as a quasi-judicial tribunal.
- The Speaker's order on disqualification is final and is expressly barred from judicial review by any court.
- A. 1, 2 and 3 only
- B. 1 and 3 only
- C. 2, 3 and 4 only
- D. 1, 2, 3 and 4
Q4. In the context of the Tenth Schedule, the expression 'voluntarily giving up membership of a political party' — central to the BRS-to-Congress disqualification petitions before the Telangana Speaker — has been judicially interpreted to mean which one of the following?
- A. A written and formal resignation tendered to the political party in the prescribed form, and nothing less
- B. An inference that may be drawn from the conduct of the legislator and need not be a formal resignation from the party
- C. Formal admission into another political party with a written membership receipt issued by that party
- D. Loss of the party's primary membership solely on account of expulsion proceedings initiated by the party itself
Q5. As per the Supreme Court's order of 7 February 2026 in the Telangana defection matter, how many disqualification petitions against BRS MLAs remained pending before the Telangana Assembly Speaker, in respect of which a final three-week deadline was granted?