Uddhav Thackeray vs Eknath Shinde : Live Updates From Supreme Court In Shiv Sena Case [Feb 28]

Singhvi: Litigation cannot be reduced to a productive industry. Every consequence of the interim order is eaten, gorged. Now they're saying that it cannot be restored.

Singhvi: As per the principle of restitution, the parties have to be placed into the same position but for the litigation and interim order, if any.

Singhvi: Here, but for the interim order, I'm not protected. The whip is being issued as we speak. But for your lordships protection, I'd be liable for not following his whip. Without invoking merger, they would be the party.

Singhvi: Your lordships have only one defence apart from merger- merger is not even claimed by them, alleged by them. In case of merger, if some leave, the remaining are protected.

Singhvi: If you're disqualified, you must fight the elections again. Then you get six months. To get around that, there is purposive interpretation.

Singhvi: All these are nullifying the tenth schedule. Therefore, purposive interpretation is vital.

Singhvi: Your lordships will therefore restore in an ancillary sense, the position on 27th June.

Singhvi: Fourth, only the Supreme Court can and should decide it here, and not delegate it to any other authority.

Singhvi: My submission is that-

A. These are extremely serious consequences for our constitutional polity.

B. They are case neutral from this present case. They are juristic questions and they're bound to recur.

C. These are all within your judicial domain.

Singhvi: The last consequence is the swearing in of the speaker- the new speaker.