© The Indian Express Pvt Ltd
Tags:
Journalism of Courage
Almost two months after a Supreme Court directive to Maharashtra Speaker Rahul Narvekar to decide on the disqualification pleas that Shiv Sena (Uddhav Balasaheb Thackeray) had filed against 16 MLAs belonging to the Shiv Sena led by Chief Minister Eknath Shinde — and a week after the Shiv Sena (UBT) urged the top court to direct Narvekar to decide on the matter faster — the Speaker issued show cause notices to 53 MLAs from both factions on Saturday.
On Monday, Narvekar said the court cannot dictate to him a timeframe. “The court cannot dictate to the Legislative Assembly Speaker a timeframe to decide on the matter. Even if it does, I have a right to not accept the notice to this effect. Yes, the court can decide once I take the decision, but the court cannot order the Speaker and force him to take a decision.”
Till last week, the Speaker’s office had sought an original copy of the Constitution of the undivided Shiv Sena that was in effect in June 2022 when Shinde launched his rebellion and split the party. The notices to the 39 MLAs from the Sena and 14 MLAs from the Shiv Sena (UBT) were issued after Narvekar received a copy of the Constitution.
When the dispute over who the real Sena is was before the Election Commission (EC), Rajya Sabha MP Kapil Sibal argued on behalf of the Thackeray camp that the Shinde group’s claim should be tested based on the party’s Constitution and that a group that did not follow the Sena Constitution should not be recognised.
Sibal argued that if Shinde did not agree with the party Constitution as amended in 2018, under which he had been appointed an office-bearer, then he had no right to claim the symbol. The Thackeray group claimed the amendment gave the party president — Uddhav Thackeray — the power to appoint office-bearers. The Shinde group argued that the amended Constitution had reversed the democratic reforms introduced in 1999 by Sena founder Balasaheb Thackeray and that the office-bearers appointed since the amendment could not be the criteria to judge the support for each side.
In February, the EC granted the party symbol and name to Shinde and his group and said in its order that the amended document had not been submitted by the party, which violated the criteria for parties registered under the Representation of the People Act, 1951.
The same month, the Shiv Sena (UBT) told a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court that it had enclosed the 2018 amendment along with with the documents submitted to the EC. The SC on May 11 held that the appointment of Shinde group’s Bharat Gogawale as the party’s chief whip was illegal and added that the chief whip has been appointed based on an authorisation from the Sena legislature party. The court held it was not the legislature party but the political party that can appoint a chief whip and hence it was crucial to recognise who is the real Shiv Sena Sena. This, the court said, had to be decided by the Speaker in accordance with the Constitution of the party and relevant facts.
Another delaying tactic: Oppn
While pronouncing the verdict, the Constitution Bench of the top court said it would not interfere with the disqualification proceedings against the 16 Shiv Sena MLAs, including CM Shinde, and said the Speaker must decide the matter within a reasonable period.
The notices by Narvekar were served under the Members of Maharashtra Legislative Assembly (Disqualification on Grounds of Defection) Rules, with the MLAs directed to present their case to the Speaker’s office within seven days, according to a source. Minister Shabhuraj Desai of the Shiv Sena, however, said the MLAs should have been given sufficient time to present their case.
Since the Supreme Court provided no specific time frame in its decision in May, the Opposition, including the Shiv Sena (UBT), the Congress, and the Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) had been alleging that Narvekar would delay the decision to safeguard Shiv Sena MLAs. The Speaker had been claiming that he could not decide without the party Constitution.
While the SC verdict was limited to 16 rebel MLAs, Narvekar has said he is currently hearing five disqualification pleas against 53 legislators of the undivided Shiv Sena — except Aaditya Thackeray and Rutuja Latke — that both camps have filed against each other. The Opposition has alleged this too is a tactic to delay the entire procedure.
As per the disqualification procedure, Narvekar will have to hear each petition without giving priority to any of the pleas and it has been indicated that the process may take time. “Now only the notices have been issued, once the MLAs file their replies, then a reply would also be sought from the chiefs of both the factions of Sena which are Uddhav and Shinde. There will be a separate hearing of every plea and only after that the decision would be taken. So it may be a time-consuming process,” said an official.
