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

Kaul: 7 independents write, leader of the opposition writes, 34 MLAs write. Our case has been that whether we represent the political party or you do is a matter that ECI decides 

Kaul: The best way is to ask the CM concerned to face the floor test. In this matter, the CM refuses to do that and resigns. And the only argument against that is that it would've been an empty formality.

Kaul: In Bommai, the CM offered to stand for floor test and Governor declined. Maybe that's the peculiar facts. The larger principle in Bommai or Shivraj Singh Chouhan is that...

Justice Narasimha: Governors power is untrammelled.

Senior Advocate Kaul starts reading from the judgement in Shivraj Singh Chouhan v. Speaker Madhya Pradesh.

Kaul: The principle remains that you cannot, merely because a disqualification proceeding is pending, prevent an MLA from voting in a trust vote. 

Justice Narasimha: In its application in Shivraj Singh Chauhan, it flags it...The thing which needs to be seen is power of governor to ask for floor test in context of tenth schedule. Floor test will be determined by this question. Because composition of house will be changed.

Justice Narasimha: Bommai hasn't taken into account the sequence in which the power of the governor has to take place in case of defection. Bommai therefore goes only that far.

Kaul: A CM fails in both cases- with 42 and without 42. Whichever way you look at it, it's the same.

Kaul: You remove those 39 votes, whose disqualification was pending, we're still through. Why should those 42 be disqualified at all? Because Nabam says they cannot. 

Kaul: My whole case is that this is a case of internal dissent. We are the faction that represents shivsena. That issue can only be decided by the ECI. As far as floor test is concerned, it is only related to issue whether the CM has the confidence