SC gives ‘final opportunity’ to Maharashtra Speaker to give ‘realistic’ timeline to decide disqualification pleas

On October 13, hearing pleas by MLAs from Sena and NCP, seeking expedited disqualification proceedings, the bench had expressed displeasure over the ‘long schedule’ for Sena cases, and had asked Narwekar to give an appropriate time-estimate for hearing the petitions.

The bench noted that the first set of disqualification petitions in the Sena case were filed in June and July, last year while the second group of petitions relating to NCP MLAs were filed between July and September, this year.

The five-judge Constitution bench led by CJI Chandrachud in its May 11 verdict in the Sena tussle case had said that while it cannot interfere in proceedings at the “first instance,” speaker Narwekar must decide the disqualification petitions within a “reasonable period.” The bench had said that unless there are extraordinary circumstances, courts do not adjudicate disqualification pleas “at the first instance.”

A three-judge bench of CJI Chandrachud and Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra on Tuesday noted, “Disqualification petitions have to be adjudicated upon with all expeditions. Otherwise the very purpose of the Tenth Schedule shall stand defeated.”

It went on to note, “We are not satisfied with the time schedule indicated before this Court previously. The time schedule as proposed will not result in a foreseeable conclusion of disqualification pleas at a reasonably early date.”

After the Speaker sought further time to give the schedule, the bench orally remarked, “He (Speaker) has to decide. He goes on to give interviews that we are a co-equal branch, the Supreme Court is supreme in its own way. He is not doing his job. He is amenable to the jurisdiction of this court. We are not controlling what is happening on the floor of the House there, the House is absolutely supreme. But he is a tribunal, hearing disqualification proceedings.”

Solicitor General (SG) Tushar Mehta for the Speaker said he was not aware of such interviews but expressed his regrets stating that if any such comments had been made by his client, they would presumably have been unintended.

Senior advocate Kapil Sibal for Sena (UBT) referred to the verdict of three-judge bench of SC led by Justice RF Nariman in Keisham Meghachandra Singh vs Speaker, Manipur Assembly case decided in 2020, pertinent to March 2017 Manipur Assembly Elections, which had said that the Speaker, in the absence of exceptional circumstances, shall decide within a reasonable period of three months the disqualification pleas filed before him.

SG Mehta told the apex court that during the course of ensuing SC’s Dussehra break, he will personally engage with the Speaker to indicate a firm set of modalities to ensure early conclusion of hearing of the disqualification petitions.

Posting the hearing on October 30, the apex court noted, “Before this Court issues peremptory directions for compliance with a time schedule for disposal, we grant a final opportunity to prescribe a realistic time schedule for the disposal of disqualification petitions, particularly, in view of the assurance given to the Court by the Solicitor General.”