Expelled Aam Aadmi Party MLA Vinod Kumar Binny today moved the Delhi High Court challenging the view taken by the Delhi assembly’s Speaker that he, despite his expulsion, remained an AAP member and would be bound by a party whip.
Binny, in his plea, listed before Justice Manmohan, has alleged Speaker M S Dhir’s letter is “grossly illegal, biased and prejudiced reply” to his query whether he continues to be a AAP member after his expulsion as he had not voluntarily resigned from his membership.
- Samajwadi Party Crisis Deepens: Here’s How It Will Impact UP Polls
- 24 Maoists Killed In Encounter In Odisha
- Varun Gandhi Under Attack Over Defence Deals: Here’s How
- This Diwali, Let Blind Students Brighten Up your Homes With Candles & Diyas
- CBI Files Supplementary Chargesheet In Sheena Bora Murder Case
- Soha Ali Khan And Vir Das Starrer 31st October Audience Reaction
- Sahara Chief Subrata Roy’s Parole Extended Till November 28
- Simple Tips To Secure Your Debit Card From Fraudsters
- New Zealand & India Team Being Welcomed In Chandigarh
- Mumbai Call Centre Scam: All You Need To Know
- Jammu Kashmir Chief Minister Mehbooba Mufti Appeals To Police: Here’s What She Said
- Shocker From Ahmedabad: Find Out What Happened
- Bigg Boss 10 Day 3 Review: Celebs Fail To Do Well in First Task
- Airtel Offers 10GB Data At Rs 259 For New 4G Smartphone Users
- Aamir Khan Starrer Dangal’s Trailer Launched: First Impressions
“The respondent 1’s (Speaker) office vide letter dated February 11, 2014 issued a grossly illegal, biased and prejudiced reply, same being against the principles of natural justice and devoid of merits.
“The act of the respondent 1 was only to compel the petitioner to vote in favour of respondent 2 (AAP), that too under the instructions of respondent 2 since respondent 1 contested his election on the banner of respondent 2,” the petition said.
“The Speaker’s office stated that the petitioner (Binny), even after expulsion, belongs to be a member of respondent 2 (AAP) in the light of a judgement by the Supreme Court in G. Viswanathan v. Speaker Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly,” the petition said, seeking setting aside of the February 11 letter.
The petition also alleges that subsequently the Speaker “issued two whips on the petitioner dated February 12, 2014 and February 13, 2014, thereby making it mandatory for the petitioner to attend the assembly and compelled him to cast his vote in favour of respondent 2.”
Binny has alleged that thereafter, he had again written a letter to the Speaker on February 12 “to clarify the correct position of law on the subject of disqualification and to substantiate his claim on inapplicability of the whips issued” but the Speaker refused to entertain the contention and refused to reply to his representation.