INSUBCONTINENT EXCLUSIVE:
NEW DELHI: Faced with regular petitions implicating Speakers of partisan activities, the Supreme Court on Wednesday questioned as to how the
courts would handle scenarios developing from actions and inactiveness of Speakers in choosing or keeping pending petitions for
disqualification of MLAs to allow political occasions to surpass the outcome of adjudication, resulting in toppling of chosen
governments.Hearing arguments for the 4th day on the problems linked to the turmoil in Sena leading to toppling of the MVA government and
swearing-in of the Shinde-led government in Maharashtra, a bench of CJI D Y Chandrachud, M R Shah, Krishna Murari, Hima Kohli and P S
Narasimha flagged the courts concerns, expressed repeatedly in earlier judgments, about the Speakers alleged unconstitutional actions in
deciding petitions for disqualification of MLAs under the 10th Schedule of the Constitution
How should the SC deal with such circumstances which develop from time to time? The disqualification petitions are kept pending on one
The Speakers do not decide
Ultimately, the occasions overtake the decision on the disqualification petitions and governments get fallen, it said.In the 2019 Srimant B
Patil judgment, the Justice NV Ramana-led three-judge bench had expressed serious concern about the partisan role played by Speakers
It had actually stated, There is a growing pattern of Speakers acting versus the constitutional duty of being neutral
Additionally, celebrations are indulging in horse-trading and corrupt practices, due to which citizens are rejected stable governments
In these situations, Parliament is required to re-consider strengthening particular aspects of the Tenth Schedule, so that such undemocratic
practices are discouraged
Appearing for the Shinde faction, advocate NK Kaul stated the Thackeray faction, having actually lost power in the game of politics and
subsequent loss of party name and poll sign, has rather rilingly pleaded with the SC to take over special domains of separate constitutional
authorities in the Speaker and the EC, and choose as the forum of very first instance the proceedings against MLAs under the anti-defection
law and likewise determine which faction was the genuine Shiv Sena.Kaul said even if the 38 rebel Sena MLAs were disqualified prior to the
trust vote, it would have made no difference to the fate of the Thackeray-led MVA federal government, which had lost bulk in your home on
Uddhav was aware of the strength of his support in your house
He resigned without facing trust vote, he said.Looking at the structure of the 288-member Maharashtra assembly and emerging equations with
or without disqualification of rebel MLAs, the CJI-led bench said, Even if the SC had not indirectly stopped the deputy Speaker from
disqualifying the rebel MLAs by providing legislators time till July 12 last year to react to the notifications rather of the earlier
two-day time period, and even if there was no pending elimination movement versus the Speaker restraining him from deciding the petitions,
its clear that even then the MVA government would have fallen
On the concern of whether the guv was right in asking Thackeray to face the flooring test, Kaul said the governor had the alternative but to
guarantee that the federal government delighted in majority support in your home.
