Speaker Inquired Before Accepting 6 AIADMK MLAs' Resignations, High Court Told

Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly Speaker J.C.D. Prabhakar on Monday informed the Madras High Court that he conducted a limited inquiry to confirm that six AIADMK MLAs had resigned voluntarily before accepting their resignation letters between May 26, 2026, and June 29, 2026.

In an affidavit filed before the first Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari and Justice G. Arul Murugan, the Speaker stated that he personally inquired with the legislators to ensure their resignations were genuine and submitted without coercion. He entered appearance through Senior Counsel K.K. Venugopal to oppose four writ petitions filed by AIADMK Whip Agri S.S. Krishnamurthy.

The petitioner had challenged the Speaker's acceptance of resignations submitted by Esakki Subaya (Ambasamudram), S. Jayakumar (Perundurai), Maragatham Kumaravel (Maduranthagam), P. Sathyabama (Dharapuram), C. Vijayabaskar (Viralimalai), and M.R. Vijayabhaskar (Karur).

Mr. Prabhakar filed the affidavit following contentions raised during an earlier hearing by senior counsel V. Giri, representing the petitioner, that the Speaker had not subjected himself to the High Court's jurisdiction by previously authorising Legislative Assembly Secretary R. Santhi to file a counter affidavit. Dismissing any disrespectful intent, the Speaker stated that he holds the highest regard for the judicial process and had earlier believed the Assembly Secretary's counter would suffice.

Clarifying the process, the Speaker submitted that all six MLAs tendered handwritten resignations in person. He stated that he questioned each legislator individually to ensure they acted of their own volition and free will, without undue influence. He noted that some MLAs were accompanied by well-wishers and supporters, and their conduct gave no indication of force or pressure.

The Speaker maintained that because no circumstances or materials raised doubts over the voluntary nature of the letters, no further inquiry was warranted. He noted that his actions aligned with Article 190(3)(b) of the Constitution and Rule 22 of the Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly Rules, asserting that the acceptance suffered from no constitutional infirmity.

After taking the affidavit on file, the Bench adjourned the matter to September 1, 2026, directing the petitioner to file a reply by that date.