Thread by @barandbench

Supreme Court to hear today pleas filed by Eknath Shinde group assailing:

- disqualification notices issued by deputy speaker of Maharashtra Assembly
- appointment of Ajay Choudhari as Shiv Sena Legislature Party leader.

#MaharashtraPoliticalCrisis @mieknathshinde @OfficeofUT

Matter is listed for hearing before vacation bench of Justices Surya Kant and JB Pardiwala.

#MaharashtraPoliticalCrisis #EknathShinde #MaharashtraPolitics

Read more about the grounds and prayers in the petition.

barandbench.com/news/maharasht…

Bench has presided.

#MaharashtraPolitcalCrisis #EknathShinde #UddhavThackarey

Vacation bench of Justices Surya Kant and JB Pardiwala is presently hearing mentioning by lawyers seeking urgent circulation of matters.

Shinde group pleas are listed at item 34 and 35.

#MaharashtraPolitcalCrisis #EknathShinde #UddhavThackarey

The Bench has started hearing matters listed on the board.

#MaharashtraPolitcalCrisis #EknathShinde #UddhavThackarey

Ten more cases to go before Shinde group pleas are taken up by the Court.

#MaharashtraPolitcalCrisis #EknathShinde #Maharashtra #MaharashtraPolitics #UddhavThackeray

Matter called out.

#MaharashtraPolitcalCrisis #EknathShinde #Maharashtra #MaharashtraPolitics #UddhavThackeray

Sr Adv Neeraj Kaul appears for 15 rebel MLAs.
States that the Deputy Speaker cannot decide on the disqualification petition in light of SC judgment.

Justice Kant: Why not go to SC?

Kaul: Kaul: Art 226 existence is a matter of discretion, but there is no bar on the SC to entertain appeal. A minority of the legislative party is taking a decision. Our houses are being burnt.

Kaul: The atmosphere right now is not conducive. I am respectfully saying, if there is not a constitutional bar, if there is discretion, then I would submit that disqualification, notice for barring hearing on the same, all have been dealt with under Article 32

Justice Kant: We do not have means to verify the statements on the houses burning and etc.
The second reasoning is there is lack of time given to you respond to the disqualification notice.

Kaul: The SC has said it is impermissible for the deputy speaker to decide on the disqualification petition till the no-confidence motion against him is decided.

Kaul: The overarching question is can you at all proceed. The most important argument is how can you get out of the specific mandate of the SC?

Justice Kant: What is the date of the notice?

Kaul: June 25.

Justice Kant: No no, your date?

Kaul: June 21.

Kaul: The majority of the legislative party appointed EKnath SHinde as the Chief. Then the minority faction which has 19 MLAs now made Ajay Choudhari as their Chief in a quiet meeting. They inform the Deputy Speaker, and then Choudhari is declared.

Kaul: The majority faction wrote to the deputy speaker about their decision.
Then the rebel MLAs get a notice to report to a meeting, by the minority MLAs. When the MLAs do not attend, based on the notice issued on same day, a disqualification is filed.

Kaul: But the deputy speaker cannot proceed while there is no-confidence motion pending.

Justice Kant: June 21 you issued notice and that is after June 25. Why cannot you raise this before the Deputy Speaker itself?

Kaul: But the SC expressly bars.. Kindly see the judgement, just three paras.

The Bench rises for a 2 minute break. Hearing to continue post that.

Hearing resumes.

Kaul is reading the judgment passed in the case of Nabam Rebia and Bamang Felix v Deputy Speaker Arunachal Pradesh Legislative Assembly & Ors.

Kaul now shows Article 179 of the Constitution which provides for removal of Speaker and Deputy Speaker.

#MaharashtraPolitcalCrisis #EknathShinde #Maharashtra #MaharashtraPolitics #UddhavThackeray

Kaul shows Rule 11 of the Maharashtra Legislative Assembly Rules which provides for procedure for removal of speaker.

#MaharashtraPoliticalCrisis #EknathShinde #Maharashtra #UddhavThackeray

Kaul: What is sought to be done in the matter, undue haste, violation of principles of natural justice. Why not before the speaker? Because he himself cannot decide this issue.

#MaharashtraPoliticalCrisis #EknathShinde #Maharashtra #UddhavThackeray

Kaul: IF the assembly is in session, then the procedure is given. If the assembly is not in session, then the assembly can be called for, or we have to wait for the assembly to convene. But till then the notice which Nabam talks about has been issued. It has been sent.

Kaul: When there is substantial issues of constitutionality, then the Courts said that they can interfere.
In appropriate cases, the courts have entertained petitions on suspension, disqualification and n number of cases under Article 32.

Kaul: The court in some cases where reply had been sought (on disqualification notices) the Court commented on the undue haste of the speaker to act.
But today the question is how can the deputy speaker act?

Sr Adv Abhishek Singhvi appearing for the Uddhav Thackeray begins arguing.

SG Tushar Mehta for the Centre points out that the Deputy Speaker is on caveat and he should respond.

SInghvi: I am the complainant, I am the aggrieved party.

Justice Kant: We want to hear the Deputy

Singhvi: Let me just submit. It comes down to the original point. It remains cleverly and delightfully unanswered. The where question is answered half an hour ago.
There is not a single point argued by my learned friend which cannot be raised before the constitutional court.

Singhvi: Leap frogging may be allowed in certain cases. If there is an identical issue decided by the same High Court and the outcome would be same, then they can come to SC. Or if there is an identical issue pending in SC, then there is slight possibility.

Singhvi: There is not one single case in India, barring Rajasthan case, where milords have interdicted. The judgment is Kihoto Hollohan is clear on that.

Singhvi: The judgment states clearly that the court will not intervene till the Speaker has decided.

Justice Kant: We remember a case of 1992..

Singhvi: That issue has been decided only in Nabam Rabia and not before that.

Singhvi: The exception is, if the speaker passes an interlocutory disqualification order, like in interim, then that will be considered the final order and then milords can intervene

SInghvi: Another case where the Court can intervene is if the court is aiding in the process. For instance the Manipur HIgh Court, asked the Speaker to decide the issue within 3 months. An objection was raised to that as well. But the court said we are only aiding in the procedur

Justice Kant: The issue is limited. Whether the deputy speaker has right to hear the disqualification petition under Tenth Schedule when there is a notice seeking his removal under Article 179 of the Constitution?

Singhvi reads a judgment dealing with Article 212 of the constitution.

He takes the Court through the Kihoto judgment.

Justice Kant: Is it a fact that in Kihoto’s case the very authority of speaker was not challenged.
In this case, the very continuation is challenged.

Singhvi: But see if Nabam Rabia is applied, what will be the effect.

Singhvi: I know I am about to do defection. Prior to going, I simply send a one line letter saying I have no confidence in you.. If you know you are going to defect, and someone who has read Nabam Rabia, then that can be done.

Justice Kant: But then what if one person files a no-confidence, the speaker knows he has full confidence, so he may just proceed to not hear it…

Singhvi: The Deputy Speaker has already taken a decision on the motion. It has been reported in media. The notice has been dismissed on the ground of validity.

justice Kant: Can the speaker decide in his own cause?

Singhvi: Yes because it is on the validity.

Justice Pardiwala: You have been called to clarify why the Nabam Rabia should not be made applicable. Kihoto case is clear, no difficulty about it. Same principle has been reiterated in Kaisham Meghchandra Singh.

Singhvi: the speaker has taken note of the unverified letter and rejected the same.

Justice Kant: If the Deputy Speaker says that no notice has not been served, then we will require the authority to say that.
The second scenario is that the Deputy Speaker has received

Justice Kant: The notice, and he has proceeded to reject the same. Now in light of Nabam case, can the speaker decide on the issue?

Singhvi: It is the second scenario. Ket us breakdown Nabam, the point of Nabam will apply only after the Article 179(c) is invoked.

Sr Adv Rajeev Dhawan for the Deputy Speaker: There was a notice received. The Deputy also replied to the notice. It is not on record, which I will place on record.

Justice Kant points out to the notice which the 34 MLAs have sent to the Deputy Speaker.

Justice Kant: The 14 day time is for the speaker to put this notice before the House.

Singhvi: But in Nabam Rabia..

Justice Kant: Let us not go into the facts with Nabam Rabia.

Justice Kant: The MLAs have sent the notice to the speaker under Article 179(c).

Dhawan: And the Deputy has written that till the genuineness and authenticity of the contents cannot be verified, the same cannot be considered.

Justice Kant: How will you check the genuineness?

Dhawan: This notice has not been sent to the registered email id and it was not from proper email ids.
This is a matter of serious issues.

Justice Kant: Then the principal secretary ought to place on record all this. What has been done to consider the genuineness.

Dhawan: On Nabam Rabia, I would say the period of 14 days will begin after a notice is sent.

Justice Kant: But this is contradictory. We will hear all parties.

Dhawan: but what they are seeking is restraining order against me.

Sr Adv Devadatt Kamat: I am challenging the maintainability of the petitions. Whether the disqualification has to be before High Court or Supreme Court, the SC has conclusively decided...

Justice Kant: We have not closed this objection.

Kamat: Yes but milords may not have to intervene at all.

Kamat: The speaker says, there are two factions. The notice is on Shiv Sena letter head. The speaker accepts the appointment of our party leader based on the Shiv Sena letter head. Now these MLAs on a purported letter head of Shiv Sena, is seeking their leader be appointed.

Justice Kant: But this has to come on paper.

Kamat: What if during a session in January there is a no confidence is raised, and then the assembly reconvenes in May, is no work supposed to happen in that period?

Justice Kant: But in that case, a special session will have to convene.

Kamat: No milords, just because there is a no confidence, will a session have to be called.

Kamat: Members cannot merely say they have no confidence without any charge. There has to be a charge.

Justice Kant: Is it your case that once a speaker or deputy is elected, it is only on a charge?

Kamat: yes

Justice Kant: In that case the person will be condemned, not heard

Justice Kant: The consequences will be far fetched.

Kamat: All I am saying is that there is no case for interim order. since milords is calling for affidavits.

Justice Kant: But they have time till 5.30 pm.

Dhawan: It is a hearing. They can appear before the Deputy Speaker.

Court issues notices to the respondents.

Order: Services waived off. counter affidavits to be filed within 3 days.

Kaul: We need 3 more days for a rejoinder.

Justice Kant: Then we cannot list it next week. then counter affidavit to be filed within 5 days, rejoinder three days thereafter.
List it on July 11.

Justice Kant: Mr. Dhawan we either need a statement from you..

Dhawan: NO decision will be taken. Milords may take my word.

Justice Kant: can we record this statement?

Dhawan: I am not be in a position to make this statement.

Kaul: I have full trust in Mr Dhawan, but then that is not how things will work. A statement may be recorded.

Singhvi: Mr. Dhawan has said in open court, everyone has heard. There is no requirement for a statement stating that the proceedings with speaker be kept in abeyance.

Kamat: May I please point out, there is no order which has stayed the proceedings.
No such order can be passed. Just have a look at para 6 of Tenth schedule.

Singhvi: Mr. Dhawan is making a statement. He is appearing for a high functionary, he himself is senior. Why should there be a statement recorded? Why should he be held for a pound of flesh?

Justice Kant: He is saying he does not have instructions to make a statement.

Dhawan: I am saying let them appear before me.

Kamat reads out a para from Kihoto.

Justice Kant: These are debatable issues, no doubt. But, today we have to ensure that the matter does not become infructuous.

Justice Kant: What we are saying is that till the legal issues are decided, there has to be status quo.

Order: List the matter on July 11. As an interim measure, the time granted by Deputy Speaker, to the petitioners or other similarly placed MLAs to submit their submissions

OrdeR: today by 5.30, stands extended till July 11.

Order: The petitioners are at liberty to submit their reply on the disqualification procedings without prejudice to their rights in the petition.

Kaul: But there has to be stay on the proceedings in light of Nabam Rabia.

Justice Kant: We have considered that in the last line.

Kaul: There is also a threat to my life and liberty in the State.

Justice Kant (to Chitnis): Every citizen has to be protected in the State. Please ensure that.

Justice Kant: We are recording his statement. “Adequate steps have been taken to protect the life and liberty of the family members as well as their property of the MLAs to whom disqualification notice has been issued”.

Order: Chitnis states that adequate steps have already been taken and the state government will further ensure that no harm is caused to the life, liberty, property of the MLAs.

Kamat: Our apprehension is that they are going to ask for a floor test. That will alter status quo.

Kamat: Till issue is decided, there cannot be a floor test.

Justice Kant: On assumptions, apprehensions..

Kamat: We have apprehensions, we will come back if anything unlawful happens.

Justice Kant: We will hear everyone on July 11.

Kamat: Liberty may be given..

Justice Kant: You do not need liberty, you have a right. Every citizen is entitled to avail that right. Our doors are always open.