In a prelude to the forthcoming general elections, Andhra Pradesh witnessed the disqualification of eight rebel MLAs from both the ruling YSR Congress and the opposition Telugu Desam. On Monday night, AP Legislative Assembly Speaker Thammineni Sitaram took action, disqualifying a total of eight MLAs, evenly split between the ruling YSRCP and the opposition TDP.
The disqualified YSRCP MLAs include Anam Ramanarayana Reddy from Venkatagiri, Undavalli Sridevi from Tadikonda, Kotamreddy Sridhar Reddy from Nellore Rural, and Mekapati Chandrasekhar Reddy from Udayagiri. From the TDP, the four disqualified MLAs are Maddali Giri from Guntur West, Karanam Balaram from Chirala, Vallabhaneni Vamsi from Gannavaram, and Vasupalli Ganesh from Vizag West.
The disqualification of rebel YSRCP MLAs was initiated following a complaint lodged by Mudunuru Prasad Raju, the YSRCP chief whip, while rebel TDP MLAs faced disqualification based on a petition submitted by Dola Bala Veeranjaneyaswamy, the TDP whip.
Earlier, the YSRCP had suspended these four MLAs for allegedly supporting a TDP MLC contestant from the assembly quota in 2023, whereas the rebel TDP MLAs openly shifted their loyalties to the YSRCP.
The timing of their disqualification raises eyebrows, occurring less than two weeks before the scheduled announcement for assembly and Lok Sabha elections.
After the schedule announcement, the disqualified MLAs effectively lose their posts. Even other MLAs would lose their active status post-announcement, unable to conduct any constituency-related work.
Although technically the disqualified MLAs could pursue legal recourse and obtain a stay to continue as MLAs, they would forfeit the benefits and influence associated with their positions.
The Speaker’s decision to disqualify them might not yield immediate effects on these eight MLAs. Nonetheless, for procedural reasons, Speaker Seetharam proceeded with the disqualification. Acting on petitions submitted by both parties’ whips last month, the Speaker issued notices to the eight MLAs on January 25, summoning them to explain why they should not be disqualified. Despite appearing before the Speaker on February 5 initially, they have since evaded the inquiry, sending letters to the Speaker’s office seeking extensions.
However, the High Court declined to issue interim orders and scheduled further hearings. Ultimately, after legal consultations, the Speaker proceeded with the disqualification notices.
