When the government of late Rajiv Gandhi sought to discourage defection, it legislated the Anti Defection law in 1985 to combat this evil. However, the Anti Defection Law had to be again amended in 2003 where it now required 2/3rd of the total membership to cause a split as against the earlier quorum of 1/3rdof the total strength of party. As per the 91st amendment, a member or group that joins another party have to first resign in order to get re-elected or be disqualified. Even the clause where 2/3rd is a required quorum to cause a split has been nullified by the role of speakers in several parts of India. The role and actions of speakers have been challenged in the court. When elected members of a party rebel against their own party or its leadership, it does not result in defection if they cause a split in the party with not less than 2/3rd of the total membership. The split group can merge with another party in order to escape disqualification. In most cases, differences within a party is not due to ideology or issues of public interest but purely out of greed and selfish interests. While the law was framed in 1985 with the specific intent of ‘combating the evil of political defections’, over the years several unanticipated consequences have come to the fore. A legislator can air differences with a party in open. Defections were most notorious during the late 1960s when large-scale migrations from one party to another became the undeclared ‘political activity’ especially from 1967 to 1971. During this period there were 142 defections in Parliament and 1969 defections in State Assemblies across the country. Thirty-two governments collapsed and 212 defectors were rewarded with ministerial positions. Haryana was the first State where a Congress ministry was toppled and also the first state where a defector was rewarded with the post of chief minister. Another Haryana legislator, Gaya Lal, defected thrice within a fortnight. The now well know terms ‘Aya Ram’ and ‘Gaya Ram’ that are often used to describe political turncoats owe inspiration to him. It may be recalled that Nagaland also had its own ‘aya ram and gaya ram’ during the UDF-NNO & NNDP- Congress crisis. The mid-70s saw regular ‘migrations’ of unprincipled MLAs from one party to the other as a government formed in the morning would lose majority by evening. Nagaland even emulated Manipur when the speaker also defected. Currently, in Nagaland seven NPF legislators are in the dock as the party has proceeded to disqualify them for going against the party during the 2019 Lok Sabha election and the by-election. The seven had not merely spoken against the party but had openly campaigned with the rival party as well as issuing a written declaration of their intent. The party had approached the speaker to proceed with disqualification but even after several months nothing was done. The NPF then took the matter to court and the time consuming process will take its own time. It is perhaps time to consider amendment to the amended Tenth Schedule so as to make it crystal clear that rebels or dissidents who openly go against their party by not fulfilling the quorum should immediately invite disqualification unless they first resign. Also such members, even if re-elected should not be given any ministerial berths as reward for joining another party.