Gauhati HC strikes down NC Hills Autonomous Council's anti-defection law

The Gauhati High Court struck down Rule 18A of the Constitution of the N.C. Hills Autonomous Council (42nd Amendment) Act, 2017, which had introduced anti-de...

What Happened

The Gauhati High Court struck down Rule 18A of the Constitution of the N.C. Hills Autonomous Council (42nd Amendment) Act, 2017, which had introduced anti-defection provisions for members of the council.
A division bench held the rule "ultra vires and unconstitutional," ruling that the NC Hills Autonomous Council — a body constituted under the Sixth Schedule of the Constitution — is not a plenary legislature and cannot legislate beyond its expressly enumerated subjects.
The court observed that anti-defection law falls exclusively within the constitutional scheme established under the Tenth Schedule, and any extension of such provisions to Sixth Schedule bodies requires a constitutional amendment by Parliament — not unilateral action by the council itself.
The judgment noted the pending Constitution (125th Amendment) Bill, 2019, which proposes to formally extend anti-defection provisions to Sixth Schedule autonomous councils, underscoring that such reform lies within Parliament's domain.

Static Topic Bridges

Sixth Schedule — Tribal Self-Governance in North-East India

The Sixth Schedule, under Articles 244(2) and 275(1) of the Constitution, provides for the creation of Autonomous District Councils (ADCs) in the tribal areas of Assam, Meghalaya, Tripura, and Mizoram. It was designed to protect the customary laws, cultural identity, and administrative autonomy of tribal communities in north-east India. ADCs can legislate on specified subjects — including land management, forests, water bodies, shifting cultivation, inheritance of property, marriage and social customs, and money lending — but their legislative competence is strictly enumerated and does not extend to residuary subjects.

Constitutional basis: Articles 244(2) and 275(1); Sixth Schedule
Currently covers 10 autonomous districts: 3 in Assam (including Dima Hasao/NC Hills), 3 in Meghalaya, 3 in Mizoram, 1 in Tripura
Each ADC consists of not more than 30 members; up to 4 are nominated by the Governor, the rest are elected by adult suffrage
The NC Hills Autonomous Council, created on April 29, 1952, covers the Dima Hasao district of Assam; the district has 13 recognised tribal groups including Dimasa, Kuki, Zeme, Hmar, and Karbi
ADC laws require the assent of the Governor to come into force; Parliament can also extend or restrict the Schedule's application

Connection to this news: The court's ruling turns on the fundamental character of Sixth Schedule bodies as limited-competence institutions: because their legislative authority is confined to the enumerated subjects in the Schedule, they cannot derive power to legislate on defection — a matter of political party membership and legislative conduct — from their founding instrument alone.

Tenth Schedule — The Anti-Defection Law

The Tenth Schedule was inserted into the Constitution by the 52nd Constitutional Amendment Act, 1985, to address the problem of political defections which had caused frequent floor-crossings and government instability. It applies to the Houses of Parliament and to all State Legislative Assemblies and Councils, making them the only bodies whose presiding officers can adjudicate disqualification on grounds of defection. The 91st Constitutional Amendment Act, 2003, further strengthened the law by eliminating the one-third split provision and barring defectors from ministerial office for a specified period.

Constitutional basis: Tenth Schedule, Articles 102(2) and 191(2)
Inserted by: 52nd Amendment, 1985
Grounds for disqualification: voluntary relinquishment of party membership; voting or abstaining contrary to party direction without permission
Decision authority: Speaker/Chairman of the respective House (subject to judicial review after Kihoto Hollohan v. Zachillhu, 1992)
Key Supreme Court case: Kihoto Hollohan v. Zachillhu (1992) — upheld the validity of the Tenth Schedule but held that the Speaker's order is subject to judicial review
The Schedule applies only to "Houses" of Parliament and state legislatures — bodies with plenary legislative power — not to sub-state or limited-competence councils

Connection to this news: Because the Tenth Schedule is constitutionally anchored to plenary legislatures, the court held that an autonomous district council — whose powers are limited and enumerated — cannot unilaterally adopt its anti-defection mechanics. The legal architecture for defection in such bodies must come from Parliament itself.

Plenary Legislature vs. Limited-Competence Body — A Constitutional Distinction

Indian constitutional law distinguishes between plenary legislatures (Parliament and state legislatures), which possess general, residuary, and concurrent legislative authority and are the primary seat of representative democracy, and limited-competence bodies (panchayats, municipalities, autonomous councils, etc.), whose powers are defined by the instrument that creates them. A plenary legislature's authority is presumed to be comprehensive within its domain; a limited-competence body's authority must be positively traced to an explicit grant.

Parliament: Articles 245–247, Seventh Schedule (Lists I, III)
State legislatures: Articles 245–247, Seventh Schedule (Lists II, III)
Sixth Schedule ADCs: legislative power strictly confined to subjects in the Schedule's enumerated list; Governor assent required
Municipalities and Panchayats: powers devolved under Articles 243G and 243W; defined by state legislature statutes

Connection to this news: The Gauhati HC applied this distinction directly — the NC Hills Autonomous Council is a limited-competence body, and since anti-defection law is not among its enumerated subjects, it had no competence to enact Rule 18A. The Constitution (125th Amendment) Bill, 2019 — which remains pending — would be the proper constitutional mechanism to extend such provisions.

Constitution (125th Amendment) Bill, 2019 — Expanding Sixth Schedule Protections

The Constitution (125th Amendment) Bill, 2019 was introduced in the Rajya Sabha to expand the powers and resources of Sixth Schedule autonomous councils and to extend anti-defection provisions to their members. It also proposes to enhance the financial and executive authority of ADCs and to introduce provisions for elected village and municipal councils under the Sixth Schedule areas.

Bill introduced in Rajya Sabha in 2019; referred to a Select Committee
Proposes to make ADC members subject to disqualification on grounds of defection — resolving the legal gap exposed in this judgment
Also proposes to bring ADC areas under a version of the 73rd and 74th Amendment frameworks for local self-governance
The bill's pendency is directly acknowledged by the Gauhati HC in its reasoning

Connection to this news: The court's observation that reform "lies within the domain of Parliament" implicitly signals the 125th Amendment route as the constitutionally correct path for extending anti-defection to Sixth Schedule councils, giving renewed urgency to the pending bill.

Key Facts & Data

NC Hills Autonomous Council (now Dima Hasao Autonomous Council) was established on April 29, 1952, under the Sixth Schedule
Rule 18A was inserted via the Constitution of N.C. Hills Autonomous Council (42nd Amendment) Act, 2017
India currently has 10 autonomous district councils under the Sixth Schedule across four states
The 52nd Constitutional Amendment (1985) introduced the Tenth Schedule; the 91st Amendment (2003) removed the merger provision
Kihoto Hollohan v. Zachillhu (1992): the Supreme Court upheld the Tenth Schedule and ruled that the Speaker's defection orders are subject to judicial review
The Constitution (125th Amendment) Bill, 2019, if passed, would be the first major revision to the Sixth Schedule framework in decades