Polity & Governance GS 2 In the news 16 times

Kihoto Hollohan v. Zachillhu (1992)

Landmark Constitution Bench Judgment

This is the foundational Supreme Court judgment on the constitutional validity and interpretation of the Tenth Schedule, delivered on February 18, 1992 by a five-judge Constitution Bench.

Key details

The Court (3:2 majority) upheld the constitutional validity of the Tenth Schedule in its core provisions.
Paragraph 7 (which had barred courts from exercising jurisdiction over Tenth Schedule proceedings) was struck down as unconstitutional — it required ratification by state legislatures under the proviso to Article 368(2) but had not been so ratified.
The judgment firmly established that the Speaker's/Chairman's orders under the Tenth Schedule are subject to judicial review, particularly on grounds of constitutional infirmity or violation of natural justice.
The Court held that the anti-defection law does not violate the basic structure of the Constitution; it upholds the mandate to the electorate and democratic accountability.
Dissenting judges (Justice J.S. Verma and Justice M.M. Punchhi) argued that conferring finality of decision on the Speaker/Chairman (a political office-holder) creates a structural bias.

In the news

● Tracked since March 11, 2026 · last seen August 11, 2026 · updates as the daily brief publishes

11 Aug '26

Split in legislature party does not amount to split in political party, Shiv Sena (UBT) tells Supreme Court

Polity & Governance

05 Jul '26

A legislative tangle in Maharashtra

Polity & Governance

24 Jun '26

Speaker Birla to decide on TMC, Sena (UBT) defections before Monsoon Session

Polity & Governance

14 Jun '26