CURRENT AFFAIRS | 27 APRIL 2026
CLAT GK + CONSTITUTIONAL LAW (POLITY)
Raghav Chadha’s first Bill in the Rajya Sabha — the Anti-Defection (Amendment) Bill, 2022 — sought to tighten the Tenth Schedule by requiring a three-fourths majority (rather than the current two-thirds) for a legitimate “merger” exception, with consequential amendments to Articles 102 and 191. The Bill remains pending. It is back in the news this week because Chadha and six other AAP MPs have reportedly crossed over to the BJP — and under his own proposed Bill, none of them could have done so without disqualification.
The episode is a textbook study in how India’s anti-defection architecture continues to be tested by “horse-trading” and “Resort Politics” — the practice of sequestering legislators in luxury hotels until a floor test passes. With CLAT 2027 increasingly probing the constitutional plumbing behind political news, this is exactly the kind of polity story aspirants must be able to unpack.
Constitutional & Legal Framework
- Tenth Schedule — inserted by the 52nd Constitutional Amendment, 1985 (Rajiv Gandhi government); lists grounds for disqualification on defection.
- Articles 102(2) & 191(2) — declare that an MP/MLA shall be disqualified if so disqualified under the Tenth Schedule.
- 91st Constitutional Amendment, 2003 — abolished the original “split” exception (one-third) and retained only the “merger” exception requiring two-thirds of the legislature party.
- Para 6(1) — vests the decision on disqualification in the Speaker/Chairman, sitting as a Tribunal.
- Kihoto Hollohan v. Zachillhu (1992) — upheld the Tenth Schedule but struck down Para 7’s ouster of judicial review; held the Speaker’s decision is amenable to writ jurisdiction.
- Ravi S. Naik v. Union of India (1994) — “voluntarily giving up membership” is wider than formal resignation; can be inferred from a member’s conduct.
- Keisham Meghachandra Singh v. Speaker, Manipur (2020) — laid down a 3-month outer limit for Speakers to decide disqualification petitions; suggested transferring jurisdiction to an independent tribunal.
Why This Matters for CLAT 2027
The Tenth Schedule is among the highest-yield CLAT polity topics — it intersects Constitutional Law (Articles 102/191), landmark cases (Kihoto Hollohan, Ravi S. Naik, Rajendra Singh Rana), Speaker’s discretion, and contemporary politics (defections, resort politics). Expect a passage-style question describing a real defection — Maharashtra 2022, Goa 2019, or Madhya Pradesh 2020 — and asking you to apply Para 2(1)(a)/(b) and the merger exception. CLAT loves the “voluntary giving up of membership” trap (Ravi S. Naik), and the proportionality of the Speaker’s role as a politically-neutral tribunal. Chadha’s own Bill makes a perfect application question: Could the proposer himself escape his proposed law?
Key Facts at a Glance
| Element | Detail |
|---|---|
| Tenth Schedule introduced by | 52nd Constitutional Amendment, 1985 |
| Constitutional anchor | Articles 102(2) and 191(2) |
| Current merger threshold | 2/3 of legislature party (post-91st Amendment, 2003) |
| Chadha Bill 2022 proposes | Raise threshold to 3/4 + procedural reforms |
| Speaker’s role | Tribunal under Para 6(1); decisions reviewable (Kihoto Hollohan, 1992) |
| Time limit on Speaker | “Reasonable time” — 3 months suggested (Keisham Meghachandra, 2020) |
Mnemonic
“52 SPLIT, 91 MERGE” — 52nd Amendment (1985) created the Tenth Schedule with a “split” exception; 91st Amendment (2003) deleted the split, kept only the “merger” exception at 2/3.
“K-R-K” — three landmark cases: Kihoto (Speaker as Tribunal, judicial review survives) — Ravi S. Naik (giving up membership inferred from conduct) — Keisham (3-month outer limit for Speaker’s decision).
Implications & The Road Ahead
The Chadha defections highlight the central paradox of the Tenth Schedule: a law designed to stabilise governments has, in practice, encouraged wholesale “merger engineering” — collect 2/3 of the legislature party, and the law looks the other way. Reformers, including the Election Commission and the 170th Law Commission Report, have urged shifting jurisdiction from the Speaker (a politically aligned office) to an independent constitutional tribunal — the President acting on the Election Commission’s advice, or a dedicated bench. Whether the 18th Lok Sabha will revive Chadha’s Private Member’s Bill, or whether the Government will table its own anti-defection package, will define the integrity of legislative tenure for the rest of this decade.
Practice Quiz — 10 CLAT-Style Questions
Click an option to reveal the answer and explanation.
