Sibal: This is what the Governor fid- 34 of them have come to me and I recognise them. The governor can only deal with alliances and parties. He cannot deal with individuals. Otherwise there will be havoc.
Sibal: The governor based his decision on the claim made by a majority of Shivsena. On what constitutional basis can the governor recognise a faction, whether minority or majority, to hold a floor test?
Sibal: The para 3 dealt with factions. An argument to say that I am the party is contrary to constitutional framework. Because he's not a party. The party is registered under S 29 of RPA.
Sibal: The constitution doesn't recognise any faction whether there is a majority of minority. When I seek elections directly from electorate, I don't seek it in my personal capacity. I seek it under the symbol of the party.
Sibal: The will of legislators is subject to the functioning of political party both inside and outside the house. He can have dissent outside the house but not inside the house.
Sibal: There is no space for factions when the governor has to appoint a CM. Now if all of Shivsena had gone to BJP, the Governor would have called for floor test - if Shivsena itself went.
Sibal: That's the Aaya Ram Gaya Ram principle we gave up! It's disastrous for the democracy. The propositions advanced by them are contrary to basic principles of constitutional law.
Sibal: The governor's acts placed a premium on the unconstitutional acts of the faction, allowing them to topple the government. He knows. He went outside the scheme of the tenth schedule.
CJI: Acc to you, there's a split which is not recognised. But there's a group of legislators who say they withdrew support. They'll incur a disqualification. Can the governor not then look at the numbers and say that this conduct also affects the strength of the house?
Sibal: No, this used to happen when the tenth schedule was not there! So we're going back to a time with no tenth schedule
CJI: So you're saying Governor cannot call for trust vote oblivious to provisions of tenth schedule.
Justice Narasimha: This argument could sometimes be dangerous also because there is absolutely no freedom in the party except for one leader. Many a times it's one family which runs it.
Justice Narasimha: There's no scope for anybody else coming into the frame. You're interpreting the constitution to say that it's just not possible for any legislator...
CJI DY Chandrachud: So according to you, going back to Sarkaria Commission report, this was a post electoral coalition party with support of independents. So according to you it's only if a member of alliance shift, governor can call floor test.
Sibal: When we enter this court room we're in a different aura, we come with hope, expectations. If you look at history of civilization, all injustices are based on power.
CJI DY Chandrachud: The only problem is that the basic principle of parliamentary democracy is that government has to be accountable to and must have the faith of the house.
CJI DY Chandrachud: Now suppose government has x number of legislators. Take a case where x divided by 2 say we have no faith in this government. They say okay we'll incur disqualification but we don't have faith.
CJI DY Chandrachud: Now going by your logic, the governor can never call a trust vote because he'll say look you've been elected as members of the house, you can't say you've lost faith.
CJI DY Chandrachud: In which case the government now only has x by 2 of its confidence, the government has to continue. It's basically reduced to a minority.
Sibal: The session is on. Finance bill is to be passed. Vote against it. The government will fall. What is the problem? What they want is, they want to topple the government, become CM- this isn't constitutionally permissible.
Sibal: The governor cannot assume that they've lost majority therefore there is no accountability. That's not permissible as far as the governor is concerned.
Sibal: Prime Minister Narasimha Rao ran the minority government. It's not as if government can't be run by minorities. Point is they don't want to lose membership of the house.
Sibal: I don't have to say more. My political experience and your judicial experience is enough to understand this. We've reduced ourselves. We're mocked. People don't believe us anymore.
Sibal: That's how Arunachal was decided when it was decided. Status quo ante was restored. It also happened in Uttrakhand- when this court restored the CM by setting aside the order of governor.
Sibal: Who is he recognising? Leader of what? The governor can only deal with the legislature party. He cannot pick up Eknath Shinde and say now you become the CM.
Sibal: It's like saying that the party is registered with the ECI, the leader is communicated to the ECI, but I as a Governor will pick up a leader contrary to what is communicated to me.
Sibal: The cat is out of the bag. He is saying that outside the Constitution, outside the principles of constitutional law, a faction in the legislative party should be recognised as a political party- without going to ECI, without registering - what political party?
Sibal: They made an argument yesterday- how could the whip act outside the house? What were they doing in Assam? You're sitting in Assam in the lap of the BJP and you are displacing a whip who is recognised by the political party
Sibal: The history of this court is the history of celebration of values of Constitution. There have been occassions like ADM Jabalpur which is in dissonance with what this court has done over years.
Sibal: I am absolutely certain that without the intervention of this court, we will, our democracy will be in danger because no government will be allowed to survive.
Singhvi: Your lordships have to go back to the tenth schedule. The tenth schedule has two components. One is a prohibitory negative code- what you shouldn't do.
Singhvi: What is the affirmative? You're entitled to dissent within limits, a zone. Before tenth schedule there was jungle raj- aaya Ram Gaya Ram. You can justify that too by free speech then.
Singhvi: Here, you don't resign, you don't go to the ECI up until much later, you don't seek condonation. What you do is a three step novel procedure to annihilate the tenth schedule.
Singhvi: Step one is you disable the speaker by a mere notice. Step two is to forward resolutions parallely to the Governor. Step three is the act of being sworn in as Chief Minister with another party fully supporting in whose lap you were in Guwahati.
Singhvi: What happens if between me, that is them, applying to the EC and speaker disqualifies me? So what? Why was the tenth schedule made? Second answer is it he disqualifies you wrongfully, approach judicial remedy.
Singhvi: Why did the tenth schedule come? The purpose is that you have come through a party seat. You go and face the electorate again, whether with that party, independent or with another party.
CJI DY Chandrachud: Merger was not an option because it's not their case. Merger means that their political identity as Shivsena is gone. Your argument is problematic because you're saying they have to leave now. They're saying they don't want to leave, they're Shivsena.
Singhvi: The fact that you choose not to exercise an option, doesn't mean that the option doesn't exist. The option exists constitutionally.
Singhvi: Everyone has dissent- every political party. But there are enough in built mechanism to deal with it. Dissent in party can be dealt with on appropriate fora. Or you resign.
CJI DY Chandrachud: When will governor call for trust vote?
Singhvi: The governor has no role at all. First answer is when the government is about to be formed. Governor will never come in tenth schedule. It's an intra party issue.
CJI DY Chandrachud: One way to look at it is that the Governor had material to call for trust vote, in which case you can ask what was the basis for picking Shinde? Second is there was no valid material.
CJI DY Chandrachud: Really the question that arises is whether there was a valid exercise of power by the governor to call for a trust vote. What happens if we say there was no valid exercise of power?
CJI DY Chandrachud: No, but that would've been a logical thing to do provided that you had lost the trust on floor. Because then clearly you've been ousted from power based on trust vote which is set aside.
CJI DY Chandrachud: Look at the intellectual conundrum. It's not that you've been ousted from power as a result of trust vote which was wrongly summoned by government. You chose not to face it.
Singhvi: I'm grateful. After I filed the petition, after I made it sub judice, and after I said its completely unknown to law and don't allow it to go on.
Singhvi: The CM's participation or lack thereof will not dilute the illegality. If it's illegal, it's illegal. How does my non participation validate the act of governor- this is the core question.
CJI DY Chandrachud: So you're saying that Article 189 recognises a de facto doctrine. What it does is to legitimise the acts of an authority whose original appointment is found to be invalid. But that doesn't validate the original appointment
Sr Adv Devadatt Kamat: The term political party is not an indeterminate concept. There may be factions claiming they're political party. But in 21st June, there was only one political party, headed by us.
Kamat: Having a legislative majority ipso facto or ipso jure is not indicative of having majority. ECI has said we have to see organisational majority.
Kamat: Time and again, my learned friends have said that we've never claimed a split. Kindly see their submissions before the ECI. ECI says it's evidenced that there is a split in Shivsena. Their written submissions say there is a split.
Govt of India and #Delhi Govt cannot hide behind the veil of corporate personality especially when it comes to the discharge of binding obligations owed by the DMRC: Delhi High Court on payment of dues of an arbitral award to Reliance Infrastructure-owned DAMEPL. #DelhiMetro
In any case public policy demands that the veil be lifted and they be commanded to take appropriate steps to enable the DMRC to meet the obligations flowing from the award: Delhi High Court #DelhiMetro
The two shareholders are not mere individuals having a business interest in a corporate venture but sovereign governments in their own right. Governments cannot shirk from their liability to abide by binding judgments, decrees and awards: Delhi High Court
CJI DY Chandrachud: Where a state has more than one petitions, it would be open for the state to file one common petition. Time for filing of counter affidavit shall stand extended to three weeks.
Counsel: Your lordships may fix a date for completion of proceedings. Other states such as Maharashtra are trying to hop on the bandwagon- they're having daily processions for love jihad and what not. They're putting pressure.
#SupremeCourt hears Advocate Ghanshyam Upadhyay's challenge to bail granted to Videocon Group Venugopal Dhoot. The Bombay HC had earlier rejected his intervention application and imposed cost on him.
CJI DY Chandrachud: How can you intervene in a bail application?
Counsel: Locus standi is foreign to criminal jurisprudence.
CJI DY Chandrachud: No but you're an advocate. How can you intervene? State can. If we entertain you, whole world will come to intervene in bail cases.
SG Tushar Mehta: We have moved an IA. There's 23,000 crores in the Sebi - Sahara account. IA seeks a prayer , from that account to have Rs 5000 crores moved to Central Registrar Co-operatives Society. We can utilise amounts which are lying idle.
Bench: In Sahara, there's a serious dispute...
SG: The society will check the genuineness of the depositor.
Bench: Where's the IA?
SG: Physical copy is not there. We had a meeting with all the departments and took this decision.
DMRC - Delhi Airport Metro Express Private Limited Dispute - Delhi High Court Directs Centre, Delhi Govt to forthwith attend to DMRC's request for extension of sovereign guarantee/ subordinate debt to enable it make payment of dues to Reliance Infra-owned DAMEPL.
Justice Yashwant Varma: The decision be taken within two weeks. If permission be accorded to the DMRC, it shall proceed to deposit the entire amount payable under the 2017 award along with the interest within a period of one month.
Justice Varma: If the Union or Delhi government decline the request, the union ministry shall forthwith revert and repatriate all monies received by it from DMRC post 10-03-2022. Upon receipt of the money, #DMRC shall transfer DAMEPL's dues to it.