The Telangana High Court on Friday disqualified Khairatabad MLA Danam Nagender under the anti-defection law and declared the Assembly seat vacant, allowing the writ petitions filed by BJP MLA and BJP Legislature Party leader Alleti Maheshwar Reddy and BRS MLA Padi Kaushik Reddy challenging the Telangana Legislative Assembly Speaker’s decision rejecting the disqualification pleas against Nagender.
The judgment was delivered by a Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh and Justice G.M. Mohiuddin. The Bench had reserved its judgment on August 21 after hearing the parties in the two writ petitions.
Nagender had been elected from the Khairatabad Assembly constituency in the 2023 Telangana Assembly elections on a Bharat Rashtra Samithi (BRS) ticket. He subsequently contested the 2024 Lok Sabha elections from Secunderabad as a Congress candidate. The petitioners relied on his decision to contest the parliamentary election on a different party’s ticket as one of the circumstances demonstrating that he had voluntarily given up his membership of the BRS.
Background of the Case
The disqualification petitions had initially been filed before the Telangana Legislative Assembly. Padi Kaushik Reddy and Alleti Maheshwar Reddy had sought Nagender’s disqualification under the Tenth Schedule of the Constitution. In March 2026, however, Speaker Gaddam Prasad Kumar dismissed the petitions, holding against the plea for disqualification.
Challenging the Speaker’s decision, the petitioners approached the High Court. During the proceedings, their counsel argued that Nagender’s decision to contest the Lok Sabha election as a Congress candidate, after being elected to the Assembly on a BRS ticket, amounted to voluntarily giving up membership of his original political party and attracted disqualification under the Tenth Schedule. They also contended that a formal resignation from the BRS was not necessary if his conduct demonstrated an intention to sever his political association with the party.
Nagender, on the other hand, disputed the allegation of defection. His counsel argued that the petitioners’ case substantially relied on media reports and photographs and there was no explicit statement by Nagender showing that he had formally joined the Congress. It was also argued that the official records of the Legislative Assembly continued to reflect him as a BRS member.
The case also comes against the backdrop of the Supreme Court’s July 2025 judgment in the earlier proceedings concerning disqualification petitions against several BRS MLAs who were alleged to have joined the Congress. The Supreme Court had held that the Speaker, while deciding disqualification proceedings under the Tenth Schedule, acts as a tribunal whose decision is amenable to judicial review, and directed the Speaker to conclude the pending proceedings within three months.
The High Court had subsequently dealt with Nagender’s case separately from the other disqualification matters involving BRS MLAs who later joined the Congress, noting the distinct factual circumstances surrounding his case. The Bench reserved judgment in August after concluding arguments.