HC directs assembly Secy to provide Trust Vote video to Stalin

Madras High Court today directed the Tamil Nadu Assembly Secretary to furnish to DMK leader M K Stalin a copy of video recording of House proceedings on Februray 18 when the motion of confidence moved by Chief Minister K Palaniswami was passed after stormy scenes.
A bench of acting Chief Justice Huluvadi G Ramesh and Justice M Sundar issued the directive during the hearing of the PIL by Stalin, Leader of the Opposition in the Assembly, challenging the trust vote on grounds that it was adopted in "contravention" of rules.
The court had in the previous hearing directed the Assembly Secretary to submit the video footage of the February 18 House proceedings.

Palaniswami had won the trust vote 122-11 in the 234-member assembly aided by the eviction of main opposition DMK and walkout by its allies, amid stormy scenes during which mikes were uprooted, chairs toppled and sheets of papers torn.
When the matter came up for hearing today, the Assembly Secretary filed his counter affidavit and said the petitioner had "misconstrued" the motion of confidence as no confidence motion.
Unlike in the case of no confidence motion, there is no requirement for seeking the leave of the House for the confidence motion and it was taken up as an ordinary motion, the counter said, rejecting the contention that rules had been violated.

It also said there was no provision for a secret ballot on the confidence motion, a demand made by the DMK but rejected by the Speaker.

Senior Counsel R Shanmugasundaram, who appeared for Stalin, submitted that despite the court order to furnish the complete video recording from the commencement of the session on that day till the end, it had not been provided.
The Assembly Secretary has filed a lengthy counter affidavit instead of furnishing the videograph of the House proceedings, he said.
Alleging that the Assembly Secretary was on extension and was loyal to the ruling party, the senior counsel said he would go to any extent to defend the AIADMK.

The counsel claimed there was possibility of assembly secretariat authorities tampering with the video clippings.
Rejecting this, Rakesh Trivedi, Senior Counsel for the Assembly Secretary, submitted 67 representatives of various media organisations were present in the assembly on that day and definitely there was no possibility or intention to tamper with the video clippings.
He also said the video footage would be submitted in the court's registry.
The bench then directed the Secretary to furnish a copy of the clippings to Stalin also and asked the latter to submit his response and rejoinder, if any, and adjourned the matter to March 24.

In the counter, the Assembly Secretary submitted that there was a well established procedural device for bringing a no confidence motion against a Ministry under Rule 72 of the Assembly Rules.
However, there was no specific rule for the confidence motion in the Assembly Rules or any rules in Parliament. The same had been admitted under the category of ordinary motion, he said, rejecting Stalin's contention that the motion moved by Palaniswami was passed in violation of rules.
The same procedure was followed in 1952, 1972 and 1988 in the state Assembly, the counter added.