top of page

By:

Quaid Najmi

4 January 2025 at 3:26:24 pm

‘Now, political defections possible without losing seat’

The recent ‘experiments’ in Ambernath and Akot civic bodies have created a political storm. Renowned legal expert, Barrister Vinod Tiwari, President of Council for Protection of Rights (CPR), gives a perspective to the row while interacting with Quaid Najmi. Excerpts... What is the Anti-Defection Law under the Indian Constitution? The Anti-Defection Law is part of the Tenth Schedule of the Indian Constitution. It was introduced through the 52nd Constitutional Amendment in 1985. The main...

‘Now, political defections possible without losing seat’

The recent ‘experiments’ in Ambernath and Akot civic bodies have created a political storm. Renowned legal expert, Barrister Vinod Tiwari, President of Council for Protection of Rights (CPR), gives a perspective to the row while interacting with Quaid Najmi. Excerpts... What is the Anti-Defection Law under the Indian Constitution? The Anti-Defection Law is part of the Tenth Schedule of the Indian Constitution. It was introduced through the 52nd Constitutional Amendment in 1985. The main purpose is to stop elected representatives – MPs and MLAs - from switching political parties after elections for personal/political gain. It aims to ensure political stability, respect the mandate of voters, and prevent unethical political practices. Under this law, an elected representative can be disqualified if he/she voluntarily gives up the party membership or vote against their party’s official direction (whip). There are limited exceptions, like when two-thirds of a party’s members agree to merge with another party. The Speaker or Chairman decides disqualification cases, but their decisions can be reviewed by courts.   Is there a similar Anti-Defection law for local bodies in Maharashtra? Keeping in mind the spirit of the Tenth Schedule, Maharashtra enacted the Maharashtra Local Authority Members’ Disqualification Act, 1986 (enforced in 1987). It applies to Municipal Councils and other local bodies and was meant to stop the elected councillors from hopping across parties post-elections, and preserve the voters’ mandate at the local level.   Why is there so much unrest in the 2025-2026 civic bodies elections? The root cause lies in post-poll alliances, which have been made legally easier through amendments to Section 63 of the Maharashtra Municipal Councils Act, 1965. They allow political parties and/or councillors to form post-election fronts or groups. Over time, political parties have collectively and deliberately weakened the 1986 Disqualification Act, and it is now what I would call a “toothless tiger.” Hence, the strange and opportunistic post-elections alliances witnessed in Ambernath (Thane) and Akot (Akola), and some others after the December 20 municipal council elections.   How exactly was the Anti-Defection law diluted? It was through a quietly crafted amendment to Section 63 of the Municipal Councils Act, 1965, which was implemented after the 2016 local bodies elections, although the Disqualification Act remained on paper. It allows councillors and political parties - within one month of election results - to form a post-poll group or alliance, even if they contested elections separately. Once registered, this newly-formed group is treated as if it were a pre-poll alliance, and the Anti-Defection law applies only after that point. This effectively ‘legalised defections disguised as alliances’.   What were the repercussions? Another major blow came when the State Government amended the law to give itself appellate powers in Anti-Defection cases involving local bodies. Earlier, decisions were taken by Commissioners or Collectors. Now, any aggrieved councillor can appeal to the State Government, which becomes the final authority. This has given huge relief to defectors, especially when the ruling party controls the state government. Now elected representatives brazenly switch sides, aware they may not face serious consequences.   What is the long-term fallout of this trend? These amendments have made post-poll “marriages of convenience” the new political norm. The ruling party always has an unfair advantage, often forming governments without securing a clear electoral majority. This completely undermines democracy and voter trust, besides going contrary to the original purpose of the Anti-Defection Law.

Lingua Pragmatica

Updated: Mar 20, 2025

As Southern leaders like M.K. Stalin rage against Hindi, Andhra Pradesh’s Chief Minister Chandrababu Naidu offers a model of pragmatism over parochialism.

Chandrababu Naidu
Andhra Pradesh

Amid the cacophony of opposition in southern states to Hindi, Andhra Pradesh CM N. Chandrababu Naidu has taken a markedly pragmatic stance by remarking recently in the state Assembly that there was no harm in learning other languages. Hindi, Naidu noted, was useful for communication across India, particularly in political and commercial hubs like Delhi. His remarks, though avoiding explicit mention of the NEP, were widely seen as an endorsement of multilingualism and a rebuke to the linguistic chauvinism that has gripped parts of the South.


Few issues in India stir political passions quite like language. It is not merely a means of communication but a marker of identity, a relic of colonial resistance, and a source of political mobilization. In the southern states, where anti-Hindi sentiment has long been entrenched, the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 and its three-language formula have reignited old tensions. No state embodies this defiance more than Tamil Nadu, where the ruling Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) led by M.K. Stalin has framed the policy as an assault on its linguistic autonomy.


Naidu’s words, welcomed by his ally and Deputy Chief Minister Pawan Kalyan, mark a sharp contrast with the DMK’s position. Tamil Nadu’s hostility towards Hindi dates back to the 1930s, when C. Rajagopalachari’s attempt to introduce it in schools met with fierce resistance. The anti-Hindi agitations of the 1960s cemented the DMK’s ideological stance, with its first Chief Minister, C.N. Annadurai, famously warning that Hindi imposition could push Tamil Nadu towards secession.


The question, however, is whether this rigid opposition serves Tamil Nadu’s interests. While Stalin, with an eye to the upcoming Tamil Nadu Assembly polls, has been relentlessly portraying Hindi as a threat to his state’s regional identity, Naidu, a partner of the BJP-led Centre, is framing it as a tool for economic mobility. His argument is not that Hindi should replace Telugu or English but that it offers a competitive advantage.


The economic case for multilingualism is compelling. Indians who speak multiple languages tend to have better job prospects, higher earnings and greater geographic mobility. Andhra Pradesh’s Telugu-speaking diaspora is a case in point. Telugus make up a significant proportion of Indian-origin professionals in the United States, the Gulf, and Southeast Asia as Naidu pointed out, hinting that this success story was built not on linguistic rigidity but on adaptability.


In a country where inter-state migration is rising and where Hindi remains the most widely spoken language, refusing to learn it amounts to self-imposed isolation. Tamil Nadu’s approach, by contrast, risks limiting its youth. The DMK government has refused to implement the three-language policy, keeping schools strictly bilingual with Tamil and English. Its justification that Hindi is not necessary for global success could be true in a narrow sense but ignores the domestic context. If Tamil filmmakers can dub their movies into Hindi to expand their audience, why should Tamil students be denied access to the language that could open more doors for them within India?


The DMK has accused successive central governments, particularly under the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), of pushing Hindi at the expense of regional languages. Yet, rejecting Hindi outright is an overcorrection. The reality is that Hindi is an important language in India’s economic and political landscape. Naidu’s position, one of accommodation rather than confrontation, offers a middle ground that other Southern leaders would do well to consider.


Some states already recognize this. Karnataka, despite its own history of linguistic pride, has allowed Hindi to be taught as an optional language. Kerala, whose migrants work in Hindi-speaking regions and the Gulf, has been less hostile to Hindi education. Naidu’s model, balancing regional identity with practical necessity, offers a way forward. Languages should be embraced, not politicized. Southern leaders would do well to listen to him.

Comments

bottom of page