Shinde Vs Thackeray: An important aspect related to the Shinde vs Uddhav dispute of Maharashtra will be heard on Friday (February 17). On the demand of sending this matter to the bench of 7 judges, the Supreme Court will pronounce the order at 10.30 am on Friday. The Uddhav camp has made this demand, terming the 2016 ‘Nabam Rebia’ decision as wrong. In this decision, the 5-judge bench had said that if the proposal to remove the speaker from the post is pending, then it cannot consider the disqualification of the MLA.
For this reason, during the rebellion of Eknath Shinde, the then Deputy Speaker of Maharashtra Legislative Assembly could not disqualify 16 MLAs of Shinde faction. The Uddhav Thackeray faction of the Shiv Sena on Tuesday requested the Supreme Court to refer cases related to the Maharashtra political crisis to a seven-judge bench for reconsideration of a 2016 verdict on the Speaker’s powers on disqualification petitions.
What did the Uddhav Thackeray faction say?
Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Shiv Sena (Uddhav Balasaheb Thackeray), argued before a five-judge constitution bench headed by CJI DY Chandrachud that there was a need to reconsider the law laid down in the Nabam Rebia case. Sibal said that it is time for us to reconsider Nabam Rebia and the 10th Schedule, as it has caused a lot of damage.
Shinde faction protested
He argued that the 10th Schedule seeks to restrict and prevent political defection, which is known to be a serious threat to the existence of democracy. On the other end Eknath Shinde Senior advocates Harish Salve and Neeraj Kishan Kaul, appearing for the group, opposed the need for reconsideration of Nabam Rebia.
Shinde faction’s lawyers argued that a Speaker cannot be allowed to disqualify MLAs when he himself is facing a motion for removal. In 2016, a five-judge constitution bench, while deciding the Nabam Rebia case of Arunachal Pradesh, had held that the Speaker cannot proceed with the disqualification petition of the MLAs when the petition for their removal is pending against them.
What did the Supreme Court say?
While hearing the case, a bench headed by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud remarked that both the views with regard to Nabam Rebia had serious consequences and hence it was a difficult question to decide. This is a very complicated constitutional issue, on which we have to decide.
read this also-
Mumbai Bomb Threat: News of NCP MLA’s number being cloned as a bomb, surprising story surfaced
