NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Monday issued notices to Maharashtra chief minister Eknath Shinde and some MLAs of his faction on a plea by Uddhav Thackeray faction against speaker Rahul Narwane’s order declaring the Shinde-led bloc as the ‘real’ Shiv Sena.
A bench comprising Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud and Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra took note of the submissions of senior advocates Kapil Sibal and Abhishek Singhvi, appearing for the Thackeray faction, and sought response of the chief minister and other MLAs in two weeks.
Shiv Sena (UBT) of Uddhav had moved the apex court after speaker Rahul Narwekar had rejected its plea for disqualification of Eknath Shinde and the MLAs backing him. Narwekar in his ruling had said no party leadership can use provisions of 10th schedule of Constitution (anti-defection law) for dissent or indiscipline within a party. He held that the Shiv Sena ‘pramukh’ (chief) did not have the power to remove any leader from the party. He also did not accept the argument that the will of the party chief and the will of the party were synonymous.
The Thackeray faction had called the speaker’s order “patently unlawful and perverse” and had said that instead of punishing the act of defection, the order rewards the defectors by holding that they are the real political party.
A bench comprising Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud and Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra took note of the submissions of senior advocates Kapil Sibal and Abhishek Singhvi, appearing for the Thackeray faction, and sought response of the chief minister and other MLAs in two weeks.
Shiv Sena (UBT) of Uddhav had moved the apex court after speaker Rahul Narwekar had rejected its plea for disqualification of Eknath Shinde and the MLAs backing him. Narwekar in his ruling had said no party leadership can use provisions of 10th schedule of Constitution (anti-defection law) for dissent or indiscipline within a party. He held that the Shiv Sena ‘pramukh’ (chief) did not have the power to remove any leader from the party. He also did not accept the argument that the will of the party chief and the will of the party were synonymous.
The Thackeray faction had called the speaker’s order “patently unlawful and perverse” and had said that instead of punishing the act of defection, the order rewards the defectors by holding that they are the real political party.
