Plea by Ajit Pawar-led NCP: HC notice to Narwekar, Sharad Pawar faction MLAs

The high court asked the respondents to file affidavits in reply, if any, on or before March 11 and posted further hearing to March 14.

A division bench of Justices Girish S Kulkarni and Firdosh P Pooniwalla was hearing two pleas by Anil Bhaidas Patil, relief and rehabilitation minister and whip of the Ajit Pawar-led NCP, and others against the Speaker’s decision.

The petitioners claimed that since the Speaker had declared the Ajit Pawar faction to be the real NCP, he had to disqualify MLAs from the rival faction based on their conduct.

The petitions filed through advocate Shrirang Varma also claimed that the Speaker had not rightly considered their submissions that sought to disqualify MLAs of the Sharad Pawar-led faction.

The NCP-SP had earlier approached the Supreme Court challenging Narwekar’s decision that declared the Ajit Pawar-led faction as “the real political party”.

The plea is still pending before the apex court.

The Sharad Pawar faction had sought to disqualify 41 rival MLAs, and his nephew Ajit Pawar’s faction had sought to disqualify 10 MLAs of the other faction.

Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi representing petitioners argued that the Election Commission and the Speaker have held Ajit Pawar’s NCP as the real political party.

“With the principal question of who the real party found in my client’s favour, they (Sharad Pawar-led MLAs) should have been disqualified. The Speaker held there was an internal strife in the party and therefore it cannot attract the Tenth Schedule of the Constitution. It is instead a case of external strife. He said at best they can be treated as unattached to the party. But that is not the concept in the Constitution,” Rohatgi said.

Rohatgi added that it was not a case of indiscipline. “It is not an internal strife between teacher or a student,” he said.

“The members would remain as ‘unattached’ members in the House, continuing to represent their constituencies, and they would still continue to be member of the political party for the purpose of Tenth Schedule,” the Speaker had noted in his verdict.

Rohatgi argued, “But you cannot have two swords in one case.”

Justice Kulkarni for the bench said there cannot be interim relief in the case and the court will have to issue notice to respondents. The high court will hear the plea next on March 14.