Justice Manmohan said the Supreme Court verdict, relying upon which the Speaker had said that Binny will have to tow the party line in any transaction of business on the floor of the House, will not be applicable on him. "Letter dated February 11, 2014 of the Speaker of the Delhi Assembly is stayed till the next date of hearing and the G Vishwanathan judgement (relied upon by the Speaker) will not be applicable to the petitioner," the court said.
The court issued notices to the Speaker of the House and Aam Aadmi Party on Binny's petition and listed the matter for further hearing on March 4.
Justice Manmohan observed that as the question of law raised by Binny is seized of by the apex court, which has stayed the operation of the G Vishwanathan verdict in the case of Amar Singh and Jaya Prada, "this court is of the opinion that the petitioner's right (for a relief) should not be curtailed".
The apex court had in 2010 stayed the operation of its verdict to protect them from disqualification as MPs after they were expelled by the Samajwadi Party. The apex court in the G Vishwanathan verdict had held that an expelled member continued to be part of the party which set him up as a candidate during elections.
During the proceedings, the high court said that while Binny has raised questions of law, it is bound by the apex court verdict which has not been stayed. However, advocate Rahul Raj Malik, appearing for Binny, contended the legislator's case is similar to that of Amar Singh and Jaya Prada and thus, he should be treated at parity with them.
Agreeing with the contention, the high court in its interim order said that it is of the view "that petitioner's (Binny) case is on the same lines as that of Amar Singh and Jaya Prada".