Delhi BJP MLA Vijender Gupta moves HC against his suspension from assembly for one year

New Delhi: BJP MLA Vijender Gupta on Thursday moved Delhi High Court against his suspension for one year from Assembly by the Speaker Ram Niwas Goel until the next budget session, for allegedly interfering in the assembly proceedings.
The matter was mentioned on Thursday before the bench headed by Delhi Chief Justice Senior Advocate Jayant Mehta appeared for Gupta. The Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court agreed to list the case tomorrow. The case is filed by Advocates Neeraj, Pavan Narang and Satya Ranjan Swain. Plea stated that on March 20, 2023, the Finance Minister of the Government of NCT of Delhi Kailash Gahlot came out with a statement claiming that the Home Ministry deliberately delayed their budget by not giving its approval. The said statement was put out by another Minister of the Government of NCT of Delhi Gopal Rai from his Twitter handle.
Plea stated that this act of breach of privilege was noted by the Petitioner in the late evening. Before the Session was yet to begin i.e. before 11:00 AM, the Petitioner submitted a Notice calling for breach of privilege of motion against Gahlot, the Finance Minister. However, the Petitioner was not allowed to make detailed
statement.
Petitioner Vijender Gupta stated that Delhi Assembly Speaker Ram Niwas Goel repeatedly interrupted on one pretext or the other and marshalled the Petitioner. After the Petitioner was marshalled out, taking back his own Order, the speaker called the Petitioner back and allowed him to make a statement.
However, surprisingly after 10 seconds, his microphone was switched off and he was not allowed to make a statement. So the Petitioner went to the well of the House to show the provision of the Assembly Rules to the speaker, stated Gupta in the plea.
The Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) MLA Sanjeev Jha proposed the Petitioner's suspension from the House for a period of one year. The Speaker put the motion to vote by adopting the voice vote and ordered the suspension of the Petitioner without any justification and again marshalled out the Petitioner.
The said act of suspension is unjust, unfair, unreasonable and against the tenets of the settled position of law but also violative of the Powers and Privileges of the members of the House as enshrined under Article 194 of the Constitution of India. (ANI)