The Tamil Nadu Assembly Speaker has established a schedule to complete the disqualification proceedings against six former All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (AIADMK) legislators who switched to the ruling Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK), led by Chief Minister Vijay. The next major milestone will be the final arguments on November 17, 2026, according to a schedule accessed by NDTV. The development comes after the Madras High Court directed the Speaker to conclude the pending AIADMK rebel MLAs case within two months. The timeline outlines several stages for submitting documents, filing evidence and hearing arguments from both sides before the Speaker delivers a decision. The case has become a significant political and legal issue in Tamil Nadu because it concerns party discipline, the circumstances surrounding the legislators’ resignations and the strength of the TVK government in the state Assembly. The proceedings will determine how the pending disqualification petitions are handled after the six legislators left AIADMK and joined the ruling party. However, the schedule does not specify the exact date on which the final order will be announced.

What Is the Timeline for the Disqualification Proceedings?

The schedule, signed by Assembly Additional Secretary P. Thenmozhi on October 17, sets out the remaining procedural steps in the case. Under the timetable, petitioners and respondents must submit any remaining rejoinders, additional replies and supporting documents by October 26. Both sides are then required to file proof affidavits or affidavits of evidence by November 2. The next stage will involve the examination and cross-examination of witnesses. These proceedings are scheduled for November 10, 11 and 12, with the respective advocates present. After the evidence stage, the Speaker will hear the final submissions from the parties on November 17. An order is expected after the arguments, although no specific date has been announced for its pronouncement. The schedule is important because it converts the court’s direction into a defined process, with dates for each major stage. It also gives the parties a timetable for completing their submissions instead of leaving the matter without a clear procedural sequence. The disqualification proceedings will now move through these stages before the Speaker determines how the petitions should be dealt with.

Read Also: Haryana Power Strike Disrupts Electricity and Water Supply

How the AIADMK Rebel MLAs Case Began

The dispute originated during a trust vote involving the TVK government. According to the report, 25 AIADMK legislators defied their party whip and voted in favour of the government, prompting the party to initiate action against them. The AIADMK subsequently withdrew its disqualification petitions against 19 legislators after they expressed regret over their conduct. The remaining six took a different route: they resigned from the Assembly and soon joined the ruling TVK. The resignations did not bring an immediate end to the political controversy. The AIADMK continued to pursue the matter, seeking disqualification of the six former legislators. The central issue is whether the pending proceedings can continue after the Speaker accepted the resignations. The matter has drawn attention because resignation and disqualification are separate legal questions, and accepting a resignation does not necessarily resolve every issue raised in an existing petition. The Speaker’s current schedule indicates that the case will proceed through further submissions, evidence and final arguments despite the earlier acceptance of the resignation papers.

What Did the Madras High Court Say?

The Madras High Court recently declined to interfere with the Speaker’s decision to accept the six legislators’ resignations. The Speaker had maintained that the resignation documents were in order and that the decisions to resign were voluntary. However, the court also directed the Speaker to complete the pending disqualification proceedings within two months. The direction has made the timeline particularly important for both the AIADMK and the former legislators. The distinction between accepting a resignation and deciding a disqualification petition is central to the case. A resignation ends a legislator’s membership through a different procedure, while a disqualification petition raises questions about whether the member’s conduct violates the applicable constitutional or legislative rules. The two processes can therefore have different legal consequences. The current proceedings will determine how the petitions are resolved in light of the resignations and the subsequent political developments. The Speaker’s final decision could also lead to further legal proceedings if any party challenges the outcome.

AIADMK May Approach Supreme Court After the Final Order

The AIADMK has indicated that it is prepared to challenge an unfavourable outcome if necessary. Party Rajya Sabha MP I. Inbadurai told NDTV that the party would approach the Supreme Court in connection with the matter and seek to prevent the former legislators from contesting elections again if the legal grounds support such action. His comments indicate that the dispute may continue beyond the Speaker’s decision. Any further appeal would depend on the order delivered and the legal arguments available to the party. The AIADMK’s position is that the case should have consequences for the legislators’ future political participation. However, whether a disqualification decision would prevent any of them from contesting another election would depend on the applicable law and the final legal outcome. The Speaker has not yet delivered the final order, and the November 17 hearing will be a key stage before that decision.

Why the Case Matters for Vijay’s TVK Government

The dispute has wider implications because the TVK government is operating without enough seats of its own to reach the Assembly’s majority threshold. According to the report, TVK has 107 seats against the majority mark of 118. The government therefore depends on support from political allies and other parties to maintain its position in the Assembly. The Congress, with five legislators, is among its allies. The Indian Union Muslim League (IUML) and Viduthalai Chiruthaigal Katchi (VCK) have two legislators each and are also part of the supporting alliance. The Communist Party of India (CPI) and the Communist Party of India (Marxist), or CPM, each have two legislators and support the government from outside. In this political setting, the status of former opposition legislators who have joined TVK is significant. Their move to the ruling party has changed the political balance and raised questions about how the Assembly’s strength and party affiliations should be treated. The Speaker’s decision could have consequences for the parties involved, although its precise effect will depend on the legal findings and the Assembly’s membership position at the time.

Two Former AIADMK Legislators Have Already Won TVK By-Elections

Two of the former AIADMK legislators, Maragatham Kumaravel and Sathyabhama, have since been re-elected in by-elections as TVK candidates after being renominated by the ruling party. Their return to the Assembly through elections adds another dimension to the dispute. It also illustrates why the consequences of the pending proceedings may vary depending on each individual’s circumstances and the legal treatment of the petitions. The report notes that two legislators, Dr R. Vijayabaskar and M. R. Vijayabaskar, were also technically pardoned but chose to switch sides. This could mean that the proceedings may ultimately have implications for only four of the six former legislators, depending on how the matter is treated. The final outcome will need to account for the individual circumstances of the legislators rather than assuming that every petition will necessarily have the same result.

Other Tamil Nadu Assembly By-Elections Also Face Delays

The wider electoral picture in Tamil Nadu includes five other vacant Assembly seats where by-elections have been held up by pending election petitions. These include the seat vacated by Chief Minister Vijay. The Election Commission is expected to initiate the by-election process after the relevant petitions are disposed of. The timing will depend on the legal proceedings and the steps required before the elections can be formally announced. The vacancies are separate from the Speaker’s disqualification case, but both issues affect the broader political and legislative landscape in the state.