Does Article 212 of the Constitution of India bar a challenge to irregular exercise of jurisdiction by a House but not one alleging want of jurisdiction?

Constitution of India — Art.212 — Art.194 — Art.226 — Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly Rules — r.104 — r.286 — Proceedings in the Legislature — Irregularity of procedure — Constitution of India — Art.212 — Internal procedure of the House — Beyond the reach of a writ court — Held: A complaint that a clause was incorporated into a Resolution without a separate motion, seconding, debate and division is a complaint about internal procedure, which Article 212 places beyond the reach of a writ court. (¶13, 14) Constitution of India — Art.212 — Want of jurisdiction — Illegality alone remains examinable — Held further: The immunity protects the House's proceedings from being reopened merely because a rule of procedure was departed from; only a proceeding suffering from illegality, and not mere irregularity, remains open to scrutiny. (¶12) Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly Rules — r.104 — Voice vote — No separate vote on each sentence — Held further: A voice vote taken on a Resolution after its amended form has been read out to the House without objection is a valid vote on the Resolution in that form. (¶23) Constitution of India — Art.226 — Silence at the vote — Challenge not entertained — Held further: A Member who was present when an amendment was proposed, read out and voted upon, and who did not then object, cannot later ask a court to treat his own silence as a nullity. Writ petition dismissed. (¶25, 28)