On 21 January 2020 a three-judge bench of the Supreme Court held that a Speaker acting as a Tribunal under the Tenth Schedule must decide a disqualification petition within a reasonable period — ordinarily about three months absent exceptional circumstances — and that courts may issue a mandamus directing the Speaker to decide within a fixed time. The Bench also recorded serious reservations about vesting a quasi-judicial defection power in a Speaker who belongs to a political party, and urged Parliament to consider a permanent independent tribunal. This editorial reads the reasonable-period rule, the mandamus architecture, and the reform recommendation.
On 13 July 2016 a five-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court decided the Arunachal Pradesh political crisis in Nabam Rebia v. Deputy Speaker. It held that a Speaker facing a pending notice for his own removal under Article 179(c) cannot adjudicate Tenth Schedule disqualification petitions, and that the Governor cannot use Article 174 to summon or advance an Assembly session at his own discretion against the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers. The Court quashed the Governor's actions and restored the status quo ante.
On 18 February 1992, a five-judge Constitution Bench upheld the Tenth Schedule's constitutional validity by a 3:2 majority but struck down Paragraph 7 — the absolute finality clause — for want of ratification under the proviso to Article 368(2). The majority held that the Speaker, when adjudicating disqualification under the Tenth Schedule, acts as a Tribunal whose decisions are subject to limited judicial review under Articles 136, 226 and 227 on grounds of jurisdictional error, mala fides, perversity, violation of constitutional mandates and breach of natural justice — ordinarily only after the final order. Sharma and Verma JJ dissented in part on severability.
On 11 May 2023 a five-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court unanimously delivered Subhash Desai v. Principal Secretary, Governor of Maharashtra — the apex court's most consequential Tenth Schedule ruling since Kihoto Hollohan. The Court held the Governor's 30 June 2022 floor-test call unjustified, declined to restore the Thackeray Government because of Uddhav Thackeray's voluntary resignation, struck down the Speaker's recognition of a rival whip on the principle that the whip is appointed by the political party and not the legislature party, and referred Nabam Rebia to a seven-judge bench. A close reading of the architecture, the doctrinal lines, and the unfinished business.