Supreme Court to deliver its judgment today in the Shiv Sena case relating to the rift between EknathShinde and UddhavThackeray factions.The judgment will decide the fate of the present Eknath Shinde-led government in Maharashtra The Constitution Bench comprising Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justice MR Shah, Justice Krishna Murari, Justice Hima Kohli and Justice PS Narasimha had...
Supreme Court to deliver its judgment today in the Shiv Sena case relating to the rift between EknathShinde and UddhavThackeray factions.
The judgment will decide the fate of the present Eknath Shinde-led government in Maharashtra
The Constitution Bench comprising Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justice MR Shah, Justice Krishna Murari, Justice Hima Kohli and Justice PS Narasimha had started hearing the matter on February 14 2023 and the judgement was reserved on March 16 2023.
The batch included the petitions filed by members from the groups of Shinde and Thackeray over several issues. The first petition was filed by Eknath Shinde in June 2022 challenging the notices issued by the then Deputy Speaker against the rebels under the tenth schedule of the Constitution over alleged defection. Later, the Thackeray group filed petitions in the Supreme Court challenging the decision of the Maharashtra Governor to call for a trust vote, the swearing-in of Eknath Shinde as the Chief Minister of the Government with the backing of BJP, the election of new Speaker etc.
From February 21, the bench started hearing the matter on merits. Senior Advocates Kapil Sibal, Dr. Abhishek Manu Singhvi, and Devadatt Kamat argued on behalf of the Uddhav side. Senior Advocates Neeraj Kishan Kaul, Harish Salve, Mahesh Jethmalani and Maninder Singh argued for the Shinde side. Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta argued on behalf of the Maharashtra Governor.The batch included the petitions filed by members from the groups of Shinde and Thackeray over several issues.
FOLLOW LIVE UPDATES HERE
Supreme Court refuses to interfere with the formation of the Eknath Shinde government with the support of BJP, as Uddhav Thackeray resigned without facing floor test.
CJI : Status quo ante cannot be restored as Mr.Thackeray did not face the floor test and tendered his resignation. Hence the Governor was justified in administering oath to Mr.Shinde with the support of the largest party BJP.
Supreme Court holds that it cannot order the restoration of Uddhav Thackeray government as he resigned without facing floor test, although the Governor's decision for floor test was wrong and Speaker was wrong in appointing whip of Eknath Shinde group.
CJI : Had Mr. Thackeray not resigned, this Court could have restored....
CJI : Now on relief. Petitioners argued for restore status quo ante. However, Mr.Thackeray did not face the floor test.
CJI : Exercise of discretion by the Governor was not in accordance with the Constitution.
CJI : Mr.Fadnavis and the 7 MLAs could have moved for a no-confidence motion. Nothing prevented from doing that.
CJI : Governor ought not to have relied on the letter...the letter did not indicate that Mr.Thackeray lost support.
CJI : The security concerns expressed by MLAs have no bearing on the support of the Government. This was an extraneous consideration on which the Governor placed reliance on.
CJI : Governor erred in relying on the resolution of a faction of MLAs of Shiv Sena to conclude that Mr.Thackeray had lost support of the majority of MLAs.