What is the common examiner trap about Polity in UPSC exams?

They will confuse the year of the Kihoto Hollohan judgment (1992) with the year of the Manipur enforcement crisis (1993). They may also ask if the SC struck down the entire Tenth Schedule (it didn't, it only struck down the judicial review bar).

What should UPSC aspirants remember about Polity for Prelims?

1. Target this Data: Year 1993 for the Manipur crisis and 1992 for the Kihoto Hollohan verdict. 2. Target this Nodal Body: The Speaker of the Legislative Assembly (for states) or the Chairman (for Rajya Sabha). 3. Target this Legal Point: Paragraph 7 of the Tenth Schedule (the clause struck down by SC).

PolityGovernance

Take AI Challenge ▸

News 2 of 22

SC's 1993 Kihoto Hollohan Verdict Struck Down Judicial Review Bar in 10th Schedule, Testing Speaker's Immunity

Q: Under which Schedule of the Indian Constitution are the provisions related to disqualification on grounds of defection contained?

Tenth Schedule, The Tenth Schedule, added by the 52nd Amendment Act of 1985, contains the anti-defection law provisions. The Speaker or Chairman of the House decides on disqualification under this schedule.

Q: Consider the following statements regarding the Kihoto Hollohan case: 1. It upheld the constitutional validity of the entire Tenth Schedule. 2. It struck down the provision that made the decision of the Speaker final and barred judicial review. 3. The case was decided by a seven-judge bench of the Supreme Court. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

Both 1 and 2, Statement 1 is correct as the Supreme Court upheld the validity of the Tenth Schedule. Statement 2 is correct as it struck down Paragraph 7 which barred judicial review. Statement 3 is incorrect as the case was decided by a five-judge constitution bench, not a seven-judge bench.

Q: In which year did the Supreme Court deliver the landmark Kihoto Hollohan judgment on the anti-defection law?

1992, The Supreme Court delivered the Kihoto Hollohan vs. Zachillhu judgment in 1992. The year 1985 is when the Tenth Schedule was added, 1991 is when the SC quashed the Manipur Speaker's decision, and 1993 is when the enforcement crisis occurred.

Q: What was the primary constitutional significance of the Supreme Court's intervention in the 1993 case involving the Manipur Assembly Speaker?

It clarified that the Speaker's constitutional immunity does not apply when defying court orders in an administrative capacity., The Supreme Court clarified that it was summoning Dr. Singh not in his capacity as the Speaker, but as the administrative head of the legislature, thus his constitutional immunity under Article 212 did not provide a blanket shield against court orders enforcing a judicial verdict.

PolityHIGH

Target:UPSC GS-IIMPSCTeachingSSC GAPrelims HighMains HighStatic GK Link

02 May 2026

~2 min

Source: Indian Express

Key Data:Year 1993Year 1992Five-judge bench

Bodies:Supreme CourtManipur Legislative Assembly

Practice MCQs from today's news ▸

~2 min · Quick mode

What This Article Covers

1.The 1993 constitutional crisis stemmed from the Manipur Speaker defying SC orders to appear, testing the Speaker's immunity under the Tenth Schedule.

2.The Supreme Court's Kihoto Hollohan verdict (1992) upheld the anti-defection law but invalidated the provision that made the Speaker's decision 'final' and beyond judicial review.

3.Examiners focus on the Speaker's quasi-judicial role, the conflict between legislative privilege and judicial review, and the specific case names and years involved.

The Big Picture

Prelims · HighMains · High

The 1993 Kihoto Hollohan case was a landmark test of the Speaker's power under the anti-defection law (Tenth Schedule). The Supreme Court upheld the law but struck down the clause barring judicial review of the Speaker's decisions, establishing that Speakers do not enjoy absolute immunity from court orders, a principle tested when the Manipur Speaker was compelled to appear before the SC.

Exam Lens

Quick Exam Facts From News

Key CaseKihoto Hollohan (1992)

Constitutional ScheduleTenth Schedule

Crisis Year1993

Speaker InvolvedDr H Borobabu Singh (Manipur)

SC Bench SizeFive-judge bench

1-Minute Revision

›Key Case: Kihoto Hollohan (1992)
›Constitutional Schedule: Tenth Schedule
›Target this Data: Year 1993 for the Manipur crisis and 1992 for the Kihoto Hollohan verdict.
›Target this Nodal Body: The Speaker of the Legislative Assembly (for states) or the Chairman (for Rajya Sabha).
›Target this Legal Point: Paragraph 7 of the Tenth Schedule (the clause struck down by SC).

Mastered this topic? Test your knowledge with a full MCQ quiz.

Practice exam-style questions, track your score, and strengthen your recall.

News Snapshot

⚖️

Judicial Review Upheld

The SC in Kihoto Hollohan struck down the part of the Tenth Schedule that barred courts from reviewing the Speaker's decisions on defection.

📜

Speaker's Immunity Tested

In 1993, the SC ordered the Manipur Speaker to appear before it, clarifying his constitutional immunity did not apply when acting as an administrative head.

🔄

Ongoing Tension

The article highlights the persistent conflict and political pressure on Speakers' offices due to their power to decide defection cases.

Detailed Analysis & Strategic Depth

Context / Background

The anti-defection law (52nd Amendment, 1985) inserted the Tenth Schedule to curb political defections, vesting the power to decide cases in the presiding officer of the legislature (Speaker/Chairman). The law initially barred judicial review, making the Speaker's decision 'final'. This created a structural tension between legislative privilege and judicial oversight.

Core Analysis & Implications

The Kihoto Hollohan judgment was a critical constitutional balance. While upholding the Tenth Schedule, the SC applied the 'basic structure' doctrine to strike down the clause ousting judicial review (Paragraph 7). This ensured that the Speaker's quasi-judicial function remained subject to constitutional scrutiny, preventing potential misuse of power. The 1993 Manipur crisis operationalized this principle when the SC enforced its order on the Speaker, using the threat of 'minimum force'.

Future Outlook / Way Forward

The core conflict remains unresolved. Speakers, elected by a majority, often face allegations of partisan conduct in defection cases, eroding the office's neutrality. Recent debates suggest proposals for an independent tribunal to decide defection cases, akin to the Election Commission, to depoliticize the process and restore institutional integrity.

Key Facts at a Glance

Key CaseKihoto Hollohan (1992)

Constitutional ScheduleTenth Schedule

Crisis Year1993

Speaker InvolvedDr H Borobabu Singh (Manipur)

SC Bench SizeFive-judge bench

You've read the full analysis. Now test your understanding.

Practice exam-style questions based on this article.

Q1Static LinkageEasyUPSC, SSC, State PSC

Under which Schedule of the Indian Constitution are the provisions related to disqualification on grounds of defection contained?

Q2Statement-basedHardUPSC, MPSC

Consider the following statements regarding the Kihoto Hollohan case:

1. It upheld the constitutional validity of the entire Tenth Schedule.

2. It struck down the provision that made the decision of the Speaker final and barred judicial review.

3. The case was decided by a seven-judge bench of the Supreme Court.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

Q3Data-centricMediumUPSC, SSC, State PSC

In which year did the Supreme Court deliver the landmark Kihoto Hollohan judgment on the anti-defection law?

Q4Application/ImpactMediumUPSC, MPSC

What was the primary constitutional significance of the Supreme Court's intervention in the 1993 case involving the Manipur Assembly Speaker?

All 25 MCQs ▸

Read original article from Indian Express

You finished this topic

Practice 3 MCQs from this news Next Article

Explore Related Topics

PolityView Topic MCQs →

PreviousCell Broadcast Test, SHANTI Act 2025, FEO List & 100% FDI in Insurance: Key Updates for GS-III & Polity Next U.S. Supreme Court Strikes Louisiana's Second Black-Majority District as Unconstitutional Racial Gerrymander

Related Current Affairs

Polity Current Affairs

SC Split Verdict on CEC/EC Appointment Act, 2023; Matter Referred to CJI for Constitution Bench

A two-judge Supreme Court bench has split on whether to refer the challenge to the CEC and ECs (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023 to a five-judge Constitution Bench. With Justice Dipankar Datta disagreeing with Justice S C Sharma, the case now goes to the CJI for constituting a larger bench. For aspirants, this is a direct link to Article 324, the Anoop Baranwal verdict, and the independence of the Election Commission.

Polity Current Affairs

Supreme Court Split Verdict: Justice Dipankar Datta Terms Centre's Remarks on Collegium 'Disquieting'

In a split verdict, Justice Dipankar Datta of the Supreme Court strongly defended the collegium system, terming the Centre's oral criticism as 'disingenuous, evasive and disquieting'. The judgment reaffirms the judiciary's independence in appointments and warns against undermining institutional integrity. Essential for UPSC Polity (Judicial Appointments, Separation of Powers).

Polity Current Affairs

Supreme Court Dismisses 2017 PIL to Abolish Hanging Execution; Centre May Review Alternatives

The Supreme Court dismissed a 2017 PIL seeking to replace hanging with less painful methods like lethal injection, but allowed the Centre to form an expert body to review execution methods. The judgment references the Law Commission's 187th Report and emphasizes preserving dignity while minimizing pain.

Polity Current Affairs

SC Retains 3-Year Practice Rule for Judicial Entry, Allows Transition Window Till March 2027

The Supreme Court upheld the mandatory three-year practice requirement for judicial service entry but created a two-year transition window (May 20, 2025 to March 31, 2027) allowing fresh law graduates to apply. Selected candidates must undergo one year of training at State Judicial Academies plus one year of law clerkship before regular appointment, effectively substituting the practice period with structured training.

Polity Current Affairs

SC Special Bench to Decide OBC Creamy Layer Verdict's Applicability to CSE 2025

The Supreme Court will hear the Centre's plea seeking clarity on whether its March 2026 OBC creamy layer verdict applies to CSE 2025, which was largely concluded before the judgment. This tests the 'rules of the game' doctrine in service law and affects hundreds of OBC candidates' reservation status.

Polity Current Affairs

Jhiram Ghati Attack Verdict: 10 Maoists Convicted for 2013 Massacre of Mahendra Karma

A special court convicted all 10 Maoists accused in the 2013 Jhiram Ghati attack that killed 28 people, including prominent anti-Naxal leader Mahendra Karma. The verdict revives debates around the controversial Salwa Judum civilian militia, which was struck down by the Supreme Court in 2011, and its legacy in Chhattisgarh's ongoing Maoist conflict.

Polity Current Affairs

SC Asks if PMLA Adjudicating Authority Can Confirm Attachments Without Judicial Member; Only 60 of 8,851 ED Cases Went to Trial

The Supreme Court questioned whether the PMLA Adjudicating Authority can validly confirm asset attachment orders when sitting without a judicial member, given the massive workload of thousands of cases per tribunal. With ED data showing only 60 of 8,851 cases went to trial, the core issue is whether quasi-judicial functions are being performed properly or merely rubber-stamped.

Polity Current Affairs

Telangana HC Disqualifies MLA Under Tenth Schedule for Contesting Lok Sabha on Congress Ticket

Telangana High Court set aside the Assembly Speaker's order rejecting disqualification petitions and declared BRS-turned-Congress MLA Danam Nagender disqualified from April 23, 2024. The case reinforces the Tenth Schedule's anti-defection law: contesting a Lok Sabha election on another party ticket without resigning from the original party amounts to voluntarily giving up membership. This verdict is crucial for UPSC Polity as it clarifies the Speaker's role and limits of judicial review.

Start Today's Quiz(25 Qs)

Take Today's Quiz

25 Qs • 5-7 Mins

SC's 1993 Kihoto Hollohan Verdict Struck Down Judicial Review Bar in 10th Schedule, Testing Speaker's Immunity

Exam Lens

Quick Exam Facts From News

1-Minute Revision

News Snapshot

Judicial Review Upheld

Speaker's Immunity Tested

Ongoing Tension

Detailed Analysis & Strategic Depth

Context / Background

Core Analysis & Implications

Future Outlook / Way Forward

Prelims Flashpoints

Key Facts at a Glance