---
title: "Tenth Schedule & Anti-Defection Law in Depth"
description: "Dive into the Tenth Schedule, the 52nd and 91st Amendments, the Speaker's adjudicatory role, and the landmark anti-defection jurisprudence shaping party"
url: "https://modeldiplomat.com/learn/lessons/upsc-indian-polity-the-tenth-schedule-anti-defection-in-depth"
---

[New](https://modeldiplomat.com/)

The Tenth Schedule & anti-defection in depth

Read 1 of 4

1/80 XP so far this lesson

Lesson 18 min 20 XP

# The Tenth Schedule & anti-defection in depth

A deep dive into the Tenth Schedule, the 52nd and 91st Amendments, the Speaker's adjudicatory role, and landmark anti-defection jurisprudence for UPSC.

## The constitutional anchor

The anti-defection law was inserted by the **Constitution (Fifty-second Amendment) Act, 1985**, which added the **Tenth Schedule** and amended Articles 101, 102, 190 and 191. It was a legislative response to the 'Aaya Ram, Gaya Ram' culture of rampant floor-crossing that destabilised state governments through the 1960s and 1970s — the phrase itself derives from Haryana MLA Gaya Lal, who changed parties thrice in a single day in 1967. The object, as the Statement of Objects and Reasons records, was to curb 'the evil of political defections'.

## Grounds for disqualification

The Tenth Schedule disqualifies a member of either House of Parliament or a State Legislature on the following grounds:

- **Paragraph 2(1)(a):** A member of a political party is disqualified if he *voluntarily gives up* membership of that party. The Supreme Court in *Ravi S. Naik v. Union of India* (1994) held that 'voluntarily giving up membership' is wider than formal resignation and can be inferred from conduct.
- **Paragraph 2(1)(b):** A member is disqualified if he votes or abstains from voting contrary to the party 'whip' (direction), unless condoned by the party within 15 days.
- **Paragraph 2(2):** An *independent* member who joins any political party after the election is disqualified.
- **Paragraph 2(3):** A *nominated* member is disqualified if he joins any party after six months from taking his seat.

## Exceptions and the death of the 'split'

Originally, **Paragraph 3** protected a *split* — if one-third of a legislature party broke away, no disqualification followed. This loophole was repeatedly abused, and the **Constitution (Ninety-first Amendment) Act, 2003** *deleted* Paragraph 3 entirely. After 2003, only a **merger** under **Paragraph 4** is protected: a merger requires that **not less than two-thirds** of the members of the legislature party agree to merge with another party.

The 91st Amendment also added **Article 75(1A)** and **Article 164(1B)**, capping the Council of Ministers at 15% of the House strength, and **Article 361B**, barring a disqualified defector from holding any remunerative political post until re-election. The presiding officer (Speaker or Chairman) is the sole adjudicating authority under **Paragraph 6**, and **Paragraph 7** purported to bar judicial review — a clause struck down as it relates to the constitution amendment process in *Kihoto Hollohan*.

One question, then back to the lesson

Ask about this lesson