Maharashtra
How many times did Parliament discuss conduct of Speaker, SC asks Uddhav faction
The Supreme Court on Tuesday shot a volley of questions at the Uddhav Thackeray faction, asking how many times did the Parliament discuss a review of the conduct of the Speaker, why is that question raised before the court, and also, why should the court change rules just because one or two Speakers went astray.
Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, representing the Uddhav Thackeray faction, submitted before a five-judge constitution bench, headed by Chief Justice of India D.Y. Chandrachud, that “your lordships have great confidence in the constitutional office of the Speaker but do they discharge this confidence?”
At this, the Chief Justice replied: “You also have that confidence when you say that the Speaker has to decide the disqualification petitions… that is not dependent on who is the Speaker, Mr Sibal”. He added that the constitutional authority of the Speaker to decide is not based on who the Speaker is.
Sibal said the a Speaker who appoints the whip and Leader of the Opposition without reference to the political party, “you think he can decide in my favour, there is no way!”
The Chief Justice said: “The first Speaker in defiance of legislative rules gave two days’ notice… this is the way everybody is behaving. There are two options: either you debunk the authority of the Speaker or.. in a democracy you value the office of the institution… denigrating constitutional offices including the office of the Speaker.”
When Sibal said they are denigrating themselves, the bench — also comprising Justices M.R. Shah, Krishna Murari, Hima Kohli and P.S. Narasimha — said: “It is a race to the bottom then.”
Justice Narasimha told Sibal: “Legislators, parliamentarians…. decided upon the Speaker to be the tribunal.. it is parliamentarians’ decision, the Tenth Schedule. Therefore, the court is only interpreting that…”
Sibal referred to the decision of the apex court on 27 June last year, where the court granted interim relief to Shinde faction by extending the time to file responses to the disqualification notices. It later, on June 29, gave the go-ahead to a floor test called by the Governor.
Justice Narasimha orally observed: “On one hand if the Speaker is with you, you would say it is a constitutional authority. What is wrong with it… if you have some difficulty, you mean, not you. Look at the way Speakers have behaved. For us, as long as the constitution bench judgment is there, we will go by the fact that the Speaker is the tribunal.”
The bench further added that the Speaker is the presiding officer as per Tenth Schedule and “we will not go back on the decision, that is the final decision, as far as we are concerned”.
Sibal replied by that logic, the June 27 order could not have been passed, and that is what led to what way we are today.
Justice Kohli said that if one or two Speakers have gone astray, would the court be inclined to debunk the whole procedure as laid down and the Tenth Schedule?
To this, Sibal said: My intention is not that, I have been telling what is happening.” Justice Kohli said then it is a conundrum. Sibal said: “Yes, it is a conundrum, a constitutional conundrum and somebody has to sort it out.”
At this juncture, justice Narasimha said: “Another question, every time this question is raised before the court. I would want to ask you how many times did the parliamentarians raise this question in the Parliament saying let us actually amend the Constitution.”
“How many times did the discussion take place in the Parliament to review the conduct of the Speaker. Why is that question raised before the court, which is not a forum for consideration. how many times parties have sat down together and decided this is not working?” he asked.
“Once Kihoto Hollohan was rendered then,” Sibal said referring to the apex court verdict in the 1992 case, upholding the sweeping discretion available to the Speaker in deciding cases of disqualification of MLAs.
Justice Narasimha replied: “Why, it only upheld the Tenth Schedule. It is your making, the Tenth Schedule. This will take us nowhere, Mr Sibal. Frankly, unless there is an amendment to the Constitution, there is a reference, a direct challenge…”
The top court made these observations while dealing with Maharashtra political crisis triggered due to rebellion in the Shiv Sena. It will continue to hear the matter on Wednesday.
On February 17, the apex court had declined to make immediate reference to a seven-judge bench the reconsideration of its 2016 Nabam Rebia judgment, which restricted the power of the Speaker to examine disqualification petitions against MLAs if a resolution for his removal is pending.
A five-judge bench headed by Chief Justice of India said the issue of reference will be decided only with the merits of the case and fixed the matter for hearing on merits on February 21.
Maharashtra
Special NIA Court Allows Activist Gautam Navlakha To Visit Ailing Sister
The special NIA court on Thursday permitted activist Gautam Navlakha, an accused in the Elgar Parishad-Maoist links case, to travel to Delhi for two months to be with his ailing elder sister.
Navlakha had approached the court for modification of the bail order granted last year, which restricted his movement to city limits.
The prosecution opposed the plea, apprehending that he may influence witnesses or skip the trial.
The court ruled out these possibilities and allowed the plea but with several conditions. Navlakha has been asked to furnish details of his mobile phone number on which video call facility is available, furnish his travel details, and deposit his passport in the court before leaving the city.
Maharashtra
Party Rebels Contesting Against MVA Candidates To Face Six-Year Suspension: Congress Leader Ramesh Chennithala
Congress leader Ramesh Chennithala on Thursday said all the party rebels contesting against the official candidates of the Maha Vikas Aghadi (MVA) have been suspended for six years.
In a press conference, Chennithala stated that district units have been directed to compile a list of rebels still in the race for the November 20 Maharashtra assembly polls and issue notices to them.
“There will be no friendly contests. All rebels running against the MVA’s official candidates have been suspended,” said Chennithala, the All India Congress Committee in-charge of Maharashtra.
In some constituencies, despite official candidates from both Mahayuti and MVA, candidates from allied parties have been fielded. In other areas, friendly contests are happening. Several leaders have filed nomination papers after rebelling.
Maharashtra
Maharashtra Elections 2024: Devendra Fadnavis Refers To Sharad Pawar As ‘Owner Of Fake Narrative Factory’; Slams Opposition Over Claims About Industries Leaving State
Mumbai: In a scathing attack on Sharad Pawar, Deputy Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis referred to the NCP leader as the “owner of a fake narrative factory” during an election rally in Pimpri-Chinchwad. Fadnavis accused Pawar and opposition leaders of spreading false information about industries leaving Maharashtra for Gujarat, attempting to tarnish the state’s image. He made it clear that Maharashtra remains the top choice for investment, with 52% of the country’s foreign investment flowing into the state.
Addressing a rally in support of Mahayuti candidate Shankar Jagtap, Fadnavis emphasized that Maharashtra is strong industrially and that the information being spread by the opposition is misleading. He stated, “Our government has made Maharashtra an ideal destination for investment.” According to Fadnavis, reports suggesting a shift in the state’s industrial landscape were false and intended solely to mislead the public.
Fadnavis Targets Supriya Sule
Fadnavis also targeted NCP MP Supriya Sule, calling her the “manager of the fake narrative factory.” He accused Sule of spreading incorrect information about IT companies leaving Hinjewadi, a major IT hub in Pune. Fadnavis stressed that both Maharashtra’s industrial and IT sectors are strong, and any challenges faced were the result of the difficulties encountered during the tenure of the Maha Vikas Aghadi government. He labeled Sule’s statements as incorrect and harmful to the state’s progress.
Fadnavis also responded to criticism of Uddhav Thackeray’s “Ladki Behin Yojana” . He said that Thackeray’s approach, focused on opposition for the sake of it, was disconnected from the needs of ordinary people. Fadnavis clarified that the scheme would provide financial aid and educational opportunities to thousands of girls across Maharashtra.
Concluding his speech, Fadnavis reassured the audience about job creation under the BJP government. He announced an ambitious goal of generating employment opportunities for 10 lakh youths and promised to rejuvenate Maharashtra’s economic stability. He urged voters to be cautious of the “fake narratives” being spread by the opposition and to trust in the state’s economic progress.
Throughout the rally, Fadnavis highlighted BJP’s transparency and development-oriented policies, portraying the opposition’s tactics as a strategy to promote “fake narratives” and undermine the state’s growth.
-
Maharashtra1 month ago
Mumbai Local Train Update: Central Railway’s New Timetable Comes Into Effect; Check Full List Of Revised Timings & Stations
-
Crime2 years ago
Class 10 student jumps to death in Jaipur
-
Maharashtra1 month ago
False photo of Imtiaz Jaleel’s rally, exposing the fooling conspiracy
-
National News4 weeks ago
Ministry of Railways rolls out Special Drive 4.0 with focus on digitisation, cleanliness, inclusiveness and grievance redressal
-
National News2 months ago
J&K: 4 Jawans Killed, 28 Injured After Bus Carrying BSF Personnel For Poll Duty Falls Into Gorge In Budgam; Terrifying Visuals Surface
-
Bollywood2 months ago
Aditya Roy Kapur, Anil Kapoor’s The Night Manager Gets Nominated In Emmys 2024
-
Maharashtra4 weeks ago
Mumbai To Go Toll-Free Tonight! Maharashtra Govt Announces Complete Toll Waiver For Light Motor Vehicles At All 5 Entry Points Of City
-
Bollywood1 year ago
Jawan Leaked Online! Shah Rukh Khan’s Film Falls Prey To Piracy Within Hours Of Release