Context: In an extraordinary display of its constitutional powers, the Supreme Court on stripped Manipur Cabinet Minister T. Shyamkumar, who is facing disqualification proceedings for defection, of his office and banned him from entering the Assembly with immediate effect.
Background of this move

• The apex court’s ruling came on an appeal against a Manipur High Court order on a petition seeking directions to Speaker Y Khemchand to decide the disqualification pleas within a reasonable period of time.
• Earlier, while hearing the matter, the Manipur High Court had stated that it cannot pass any order as the question of whether a High Court can direct a Speaker to decide on a disqualification petition within a time frame is pending before a Supreme Court Bench.
• A three-judge Supreme Court Bench had asked the Speaker to decide the disqualification petitions within four weeks. 
• The deadline was not met, and the Additional Solicitor General, appearing for the Speaker, had submitted that a detailed petition would be filed in ten days.
• The apex court while delivering the judgement said that it went out of our way to give the Hon’ble Speaker a chance to perform his functions under the Tenth Schedule to the Constitution of India and decide the matter.

About Article 212

• According to Article 212, the courts in India including the Supreme Court cannot interfere in the proceedings of the Legislature of state.
• However,this has been overruled by the Supreme Court in this matter by invoking special powers under Article 142. 

About Article 142

• Article 142 provides for the enforcement of decrees and orders of Supreme Court.It consists of two clauses:
• Article 142(1): It states that the Supreme Court in the exercise of its jurisdiction may pass such decree or make such order as is necessary for doing complete justice in any cause or matter pending before it and the orders shall be enforceable throughout the territory of India.
• Article 142(2): It states that the Supreme Court shall have the power to make any order for the purpose of (a)securing the attendance of any person, (b)the discovery or production of any documents or (c)the investigation or punishment of any contempt of itself.

About Disqualification under the Tenth Schedule

• The Anti-Defection Law was passed in 1985 through the 52nd amendment to the Constitution. It added the Tenth Schedule to the Indian Constitution. The main intent of the law was to combat “the evil of political defections”.

Provisions 

• Members of Political parties:  A member of the house(parliament or state legislature) becomes disqualified for being the member of the house in case of following :

(a) If he gives up the membership of political party  voluntarily .
(b) If he votes or abstains from voting contrary to the directions issued by his political party without obtaining prior permission of party and such an act has not been condoned by party within 15 days.

• Independent members: Such a member becomes disqualified for being the member of the house in case he joins a political party after being elected to the house.
• Nominated member: Such a member becomes disqualified if he joins a political party after the expiry of six months from the date on which he takes the seat in the house

Exceptions to the disqualification on the ground of defection (Two cases)

• If a member goes out of his party as a result of a merger of the party with another party. A merger takes place when two-thirds of the members of the party have agreed to such merger.
• If a member, after being elected as the presiding officer of the House, voluntarily gives up the membership of his party or rejoins it after he ceases to hold that office. This exemption has been provided in view of the dignity and impartiality of the office.

Powers of Speaker with regard to Anti-Defection Law

• Any question regarding disqualification arising out of defection is to be decided by the presiding officer of the House.
• After the Kihoto Hollohan case (1993), the Supreme Court declared that the decision of the presiding officer is not final and can be questioned in any court. It is subject to judicial review on the grounds of malafide, perversity, etc.