New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Thursday queried whether the Maharashtra Legislative Assembly Speaker's reliance on the test of legislative majority to decide, which is the real Shiv Sena, contrary to the May 2023, judgment of the apex court. The apex court has also summoned all original documents about the disqualification case hearing from the Speaker’s office.
In the May 2023 Subhash Desai's judgment, the apex court had said that instead of a legislative majority, what is to be considered is the evaluation of the majority in the organisational wings of the political party, an analysis of provisions of the party constitution, or any other appropriate test.
Today, a three-judge bench led by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud and comprising justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra was hearing a petition filed by Shiv Sena UBT (Uddhav Balasaheb Thackeray) challenging Maharashtra Assembly Speaker's refusal to disqualify MLAs of Eknath Shinde group.
Senior advocates AM Singhvi, Kapil Sibal and Devdutt Kamat appeared for the Shiv Sena UBT and senior advocates Harish Salve, Mukul Rohatgi and Mahesh Jethmalani, represented the Shinde group. At the outset, Sibal, seeking an early hearing on the case by the apex court, said elections to the Assembly would be held in either October or November of 2024, the court has already given a judgment and notice has been issued and the other side has not filed a reply.
Sibal said the matter should be expeditiously decided otherwise the whole matter will become infructuous. Sibal said the Shinde faction has gone to the High Court and they are trying to send my client back to the High Court and stressed that his client has a constitutional right to come to the apex court.
Sibal contended, “What he (Speaker) said is that legislative majority because they have a legislative majority, they are the party. He also holds that the legislative majority happened on June 21, 2022, when there was no application before the Election Commission. Your lordships know that the party on June 21 was headed by Uddhav Thackeray…he (Speaker) does not accept the 2018 Constitution because it was not filed before the Election Commission”. Sibal said the Speaker had gone by the 1999 Constitution of the Shiv Sena, which nobody had discussed.
Singhvi said Subhash Desai's judgment delivered in May 2023, decided that where there is a question of legislative majority vs organisational majority post-defection, the inherently legislative majority cannot be the basis, as one is counting on legislative majority based on defections and the apex court has made it clear that legislative majority will not apply, however, the Speaker has applied that.
Salve said what your lordships are called upon to decide is not the question of legislative majority, rather documents produced are brazenly fabricated, including documents produced in this court. “A fantastic question is asked to a witness, is it true that you deliberately forged your signatures and signed…..”, said Salve, insisting that the matter should be first examined by the High Court.
