Justice Arun Mishra asks Sibal can't a court intervene when the Speaker suspends or disqualifies a MLA even as the proceedings are pending before the court?
Sibal answers in affirmative. "But only when the Speaker disqualifies or suspends."
No writ can lie to challenge any proceedings prior to the disqualification: Sibal
HC directions are in teeth of the Kihoto judgement, he adds.
Justice Mishra asks Sibal: "Hasn't the High Couet also heard you on this aspect? What are your grounds of challenge? Show us."
Sibal refers to a recent #SupremeCourt judgement that asked Speaker to decide within a reasonable time frame. This judgement also said there cannot be a protective order preventing a decision on the disqualification proceedings.
Sibal now reads out the whip issued by Mahesh Joshi asking Pilot, others to attend the CLP meeting.
SC: Is a whip permissible for something outside the assembly?
Sibal: Whip isn't defined anywhere but a chief whip can issue a whip to the party members for attending a CLP.
SC asks Sibal: On what grounds have been disqualification sought here?
Sibal: They didn't attend party meeting. They are indulging in anti-party activities. They gave interviews that they want a floor test. They are in a hotel in Haryana, incommunicado.
SC asks Sibal to read out the notices by the #Speaker to 19 rebel MLAs.
Sibal is now reading out the notices of disqualification issued to #SachinPilot and others.
MLAs can't file a petition saying Speaker can't issue them notices. I haven't decided anything yet, Sibal submits in the #SupremeCourt.
Sr adv Mukul Rohatgi, Harish Salve appear for #SachinPilot, other MLAs.
Rohatgi points out that the Speaker himself had given two letters in the HC agreeing for deferment of proceedings but he has not put those letters on record.
But it is about a lot more than just not attending a meeting. It is about their anti-party activities. And as a Speaker, I will have to decide all this: Sibal.
SC: Let this matter be heard at length. This will require detailed hearing. Your questions require lengthy hearing.
Sibal: So suspend the HC order
SC: But that's what we need to examine
Sibal: But this question will become infructuous
Sibal asks for transferring the HC matter here but court says it can't be done right now.
Sibal now asks for an order to stay the further proceedings before the high court.
Salve too points out Speaker had deferred the proceedings on his own twice in the past.
He adds issues of jurisdiction and maintainability have been argued before the HC. "Having appeared and argued there, why should he now ask HC not to decide?"
SC: Can we say order of the high court will be subject to the outcome here?
Sadhguru's Isha Foundation moves the #SupremeCourt, challenging the Madras HC order that led to police personnel entering the ashram to conduct inquiries. Central government supports the petition.
Sr adv Mukul Rohatgi seeks an urgent hearing today.
Rohatgi to SC: There's someone behind all this. The habeas corpus petition filed by the mother of two women, who are now monks, was disposed of 8 years ago. Now, the father comes back and despite the monks expressing their desire to stay put, the high court ordered inquiry.
#CJI enquires if the two women are online.
Rohatgi says the women are connected online and are willing to make a statement right away.
#SupremeCourt reproaches the #Kerala Govt over #lockdown relaxations owing to #Bakrid. SC calls it shocking state of affairs that the state government gave in to pressure groups.
SC adds affidavit by the #Kerala Govt is alarming & doesn't in real manner safeguards right to life guaranteed to all the citizens of #India.
#SupremeCourt underlines if there is any spread of the infection due to the relaxations by the #Kerala Govt owing to #Bakrid, any person can bring it to the notice of the court which will then take appropriate action.
Hearing to commence before the #SupremeCourt on suo motu on the #KanwarYatra.
An application has been filed in this matter by @pkdnambiar against relaxation of lockdown norms in #Kerala for #Bakrid celebrations.
Hearing begins. Court goes through the latest affidavit by the #UttarPradesh Govt, cancelling the #KanwarYatra.
Sr adv CS Vaidyanathan reads out the affidavit that states that kanwar sanghs have themselves decided not to have the #KanwarYatra & hence, no orders from the state disaster management authority is required.
Of 527 pages on acquittal of Tarun Tejpal, #Goa judge Kshama M Joshi has used around 400 pages, dissecting testimony of the complainant in arriving at how an 'educated journalist' should've known whether she 'pulled up' her underwear or 'picked up'.
Goa court scans the complainant's phone & messages to note that "it was entirely the norm" for her to have flirtatious relationships & sexual conversations with friends & acquaintances.
Since she refused to give access to her email citing concerns of privacy when her phone details had already been used to humiliate her over her personal details, #Goa judge holds that she "wants to hide something."
#SupremeCourt issues notices to #WestBengal Govt & Centre on a PIL for a SIT probe into post-poll violence in the state & massive displacement of people.
SC also seeks responses from national commissions for women & children on providing relief in camps etc. Next hearing in June
Another petition filed by families of two #BJP supporters allegedly killed by #TMC workers will also be taken up by the #SupremeCourt later today.
#WestBengal Govt, through sr adv Sidharth Luthra, points out that post-poll violence matter is already pending before a five-judge bench in the #Calcutta HC and hence, the #SupremeCourt may not need to hear this matter at this juncture.
#SupremeCourt commences hearing of its suo motu proceedings on ameliorating the conditions of migrant workers during the #COVID19 induced #lockdown.
It expresses displeasure at Centre not submitting its affidavit in time.
"You were directed to file your affidavit a day before the hearing but you have done it just now. Our orders are meant to be compiled with," SC tells Centre.
Adv Prashant Bhushan, appearing on behalf of some activists, addresses the shortcomings in replies filed by states.
SC clarifies it hasn't directed states to grant cash transfer in lieu of dry ration after Bhushan mentions that court also wanted to know about cash transfers.
As he talks about cooked food, SC observes the situation doesn't appear to be as grave as last year for migrant workers