New Delhi: The Supreme Court’s Constitution Bench consisting of Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud pronounced its verdict regarding a set of petitions related to the Uddhav Thackeray-Eknath Shinde split in the Shiv Sena and the subsequent change of government in Maharashtra in 2022.
Because Thackeray resigned, the Governor was right in inviting the Shinde-led coalition to form the government, SC said.
Gold Rate
Saturday08 Feb. 2025
The apex court held that it cannot order the restoration of Uddhav Government as he resigned without facing floor test, although the Governor’s decision for floor test was wrong and Speaker was wrong in appointing the whip of Eknath Shinde group.
SC says had Uddhav Thackeray not resigned, it could have restored the status quo. The SC said that petitioners argued for restoration of status quo ante. However, Thackeray did not face the floor test.
Governor ought not to have relied on the letter…the letter did not indicate that Uddhav Thackeray lost support. Exercise of discretion by the Governor was not in accordance with the Constitution, said the SC
The Supreme Court said that the security concerns expressed by MLAs have no bearing on the support of the government. This was an extraneous consideration on which the Governor placed reliance on. Nothing in any of the communications relied on by the Governor indicated that the dissatisfied MLAs wanted to withdraw support to the government. Neither the Constitution nor the law empower the governor to enter the political arena and play a role either in inter-party or intra-party disputes.
Floor test cannot be used to resolve internal party disputes, SC says. The Assembly was not in session when Devendra Fadnavis wrote to the government. The opposition parties did not issue any no-confidence motion. The Governor had no objective material to doubt the confidence of the government, notes SC
SC said EC can decide under the symbols order despite the pendency of proceedings before Speaker. The EC had earlier awarded the official Sena symbol to the Shinde-led faction
Supreme Court held that the Speaker’s decision to appoint Bharat Gogawale (backed by Shinde group) as the whip of the Shiv Sena party was illegal
The court said that the 2016 Nabam Rebia case which held that Speaker cannot initiate disqualification proceedings when a resolution seeking their removal is pending requires reference to a larger bench.
Supreme Court also noted that issues such as whether a notice to the removal of the Speaker will restrict his power to issue disqualification notices need an examination by a larger bench. The court also held that Speaker’s decision to appoint Gogawale (backed by the Shinde Group) as the whip of Shiv Sena party was illegal.
The Supreme Court’s Constitution Bench consisting of Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud and Justices M R Shah, Krishna Murari, Hima Kohli, and P S Narasimha pronounced its verdict regarding a set of petitions related to the Uddhav Thackeray-Eknath Shinde split in the Shiv Sena and the subsequent change of government in Maharashtra in 2022.
The Uddhav faction has sought the quashing of the July 22 floor test that put Eknath Shinde on the CM’s chair. They have also sought a declaration that the rebel MLAs would be “deemed disqualified” from the date of the “anti-party activity,” and therefore Shinde could not have been made the CM.
The Shinde faction has raised concerns regarding the power of the Assembly Speaker to consider disqualification proceedings, even though the 2016 Nabam Rebia judgment of a five-judge bench held that a Speaker cannot consider such proceedings if no confidence proceedings against him/her are pending before the House.
