Uddhav Thackeray vs Eknath Shinde : Live Updates From Supreme Court Hearing In Shiv Sena case [Feb 23]

Singhvi: The second, there is a direct finding in not one but many paras of EC order that there is a split.

Singhvi: There is no basis on which your lordships can reconcile the factual invitation and oath giving on one hand with the legal deletion of para 3. The two are inconciliable. That's a constitutional sin.

Singhvi: Clearly the governor is acting on the presumption of a split. 

Singhvi: Para 3 deletion is not a small thing. Why this case is bizarre is because there has been atleast two circumvention of that deletion directly by high constitutional authorities.

Singhvi: My lords put the question of governor's role- why can't he go and have a trust vote. First thing is your lordships fundamental principle of interpretation of constitution is that if constitutional assembly deletes something, full weight is given to intention of deletion

Dr AM Singhvi: I want to start on role of governor. This is a very unique and a strange case, and a sorry case. 

Sibal: I stand here not for this case.

I stand here for the protection of what is so close to our heart- institutional integrity and to ensure that constitutional processes survive. If your lordships uphold this, it would be the death of what we've upheld since 1950s.

Sibal: If this kind of manipulation in the process of institutional decision making, I don't know where we'll go.

Sibal: This represents two factions in party- the minutes of meeting. That's how the ECI got jurisdiction as per them. On this basis the final order was passed- that's how they got the symbol.

Sibal: This petition is filed on 19th July and the minutes are dated 27th July. This is what they filed. 19th July they could not have known what happens on 27th and make minutes. These are the two documents with ECI.