SC Ruling on Sena vs. Sena

What’s in today’s article?

• Why in news?
• What is the background of petitions before the Supreme Court and claims made by rival parties?
• What is 2016 Nabam Rebia judgment?
• News Summary: SC ruling on Sena vs. Sena
• What SC said in ruling on Sena tussle?

 

Why in news?

• The Supreme Court has passed a unanimous judgement on the various issues related to the split in Shiv Sena in June 2022.
• While passing the judgement, the apex court made strong observations about the role of the then Governor of Maharashtra and the Speaker of the Legislative Assembly.
• The court, however, refrained from interfering with the proceedings related to disqualifying 16 MLAs, including Chief Minister Eknath Shinde.

 

What is the background of petitions before the Supreme Court and claims made by rival parties?

• Unfolding of Shiv Sena crisis
  • In June 2022, a group of Shiv Sena MLAs led by Eknath Shinde rebelled against Uddhav Thackeray.
  • When it became evident that the rebel would call for a trust, the Shinde received disqualification notices from the then deputy speaker.
• Matter reaches to Supreme Court
  • The faction moved the Supreme Court to consider whether the rebels should be disqualified.
  • The plea also challenged the disqualification notices served on Shinde and 15 MLAs supporting him.
    • The top court granted interim relief to Shinde by extending the time to file responses to the disqualification notices.
  • It, later, gave the go-ahead to a floor test called by the governor. Because the then government did not have the requisite numbers, Uddhav Thackeray resigned as chief minister.
  • Subsequently, the Thackeray camp filed petitions before the Supreme Court.
    • It challenged the summoning of the assembly by the Maharashtra governor.
    • It also argued that Nabam Rebia judgement enables defecting MLAs to stall disqualification proceedings by issuing a notice seeking the speaker’s removal.
• Matter referred to five-judge Constitution Bench
  • In August 2022, a three-judge SC bench led by then CJI N V Ramana referred the questions arising out of petitions filed by rival camps to a five-judge Constitution Bench.
  • It said that the Nabam Rebia verdict requires gap filling to uphold constitutional morality.

 

What is 2016 Nabam Rebia judgment?

• In Nabam Rebia case (2016), the SC held that a speaker will be disabled from deciding disqualification petitions under the anti-defection law (10th schedule of the constitution) if a notice for their removal is pending.
• In other words, this judgement stopped a Speaker facing removal notice from deciding disqualification pleas against members of legislatures under anti-defection law.

 

News Summary: SC ruling on Sena vs. Sena

• In a unanimous judgment, the Supreme Court held that the then Maharashtra Governor’s call for a trust vote was illegal.
• But the Court also said that it could not reinstate Mr. Thackeray as Chief Minister because he had resigned instead of facing the trust vote.

 

What SC said in ruling on Sena tussle?

• Disqualification of MLAs
  • The Supreme Court said while cannot interfere in the proceedings.
  • The Speaker of the Maharashtra Assembly must decide on the issue of the disqualification of the 16 MLAs.
• On restoring Uddhav Thackeray govt
  • The SC held since Uddhav Thackeray resigned as the chief minister and did not face the floor test, his government cannot be reinstated.
  • It said had Thackeray refrained from resigning from his post, the court could have restored his government.
  • The court also held that the decision of the governor in calling Shinde to administer him an oath as CM was justified.
• On governor’s role in calling floor test
  • The court held that by calling the floor test, the then Maharashtra governor did not act in accordance with the law as he had no objective material to doubt the confidence of the Thackeray government in the House.
  • The court said the Governor had acted upon an inference that a section of the Shiv Sena wished to withdraw their support to the government.
    • However, the communication by some of the MLAs only expressed discontent about the Maha Vikas Aghadi alliance.
  • It said that the power of the Governor to act without the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers is of an extraordinary nature, and must be exercised with circumspection within the limits of law.
  • It also said that the Governor is not empowered to enter the political arena and play a role in inter or intra party disputes.
• Appointment of whip from Shinde group illegal
  • The top court held the appointment of Bharat Gogawale as the Chief Whip of the Shiv Sena to be illegal.
    • As the Shiv Sena MLAs’ rebellion was unfolding, the then party chief whip (Prabhu) issued a whip directing all the MLAs to attend a meeting at the then CM’s.
    • Those in attendance passed a resolution to remove Eknath Shinde as Group Leader of its legislative party.
    • The Shinde-led faction then issued its own resolution, removing Prabhu as the whip and appointing Bharat Gogawale in his place.
    • After assuming office, Speaker Rahul Narvekar recognised Gogawale as the whip.
  • It said the appointment of the chief whip by a political party is crucial to the Tenth Schedule and the system will crumble if it is not complied with.
    • The Tenth Schedule of the Indian Constitution is also known as the Anti-Defection Law.
    • It was added to the Constitution in 1985 through the 52nd Amendment Act.
  • It also held that the speaker should have conducted an independent inquiry to identify two whips issued by (the two factions) the political party.
• Legislature party, political party distinct
  • While the Shinde-led faction argued that the legislature party and the political party are inextricably intertwined, the court said the two could not be conflated.
  • The court said that as per provisions of the Representation of the People Act, an association of individuals calling itself a political party has to be registered with the EC.
  • The court said that Parliament had recognised the independent existence of a legislature party to the limited extent of providing a defence to actions of legislators of the political party.
    • For instance, the freedom of expression of legislators in the House, or intra-party dissent, cannot fall within the purview of anti-defection laws.
  • The court said that a whip interacts with members of the legislature party to communicate the directions of the political party.
  • It held that it is the political party and not the legislature party which appoints the Whip and the Leader of the party in the House.
  • Therefore, it said the Speaker must recognise only the whip and leader who are duly recognised by the political party.
• Speaker and EC can adjudicate issues concurrently
  • The court said it could not accept the contention that the EC was barred from deciding on the party symbol dispute until the Speaker decided the disqualification pleas before him.
  • The court said this would amount to indefinitely staying proceedings before the ECI.
    • This is because the Speaker’s decision would attain finality only after the appeals against his decision were disposed of.
• Referral of issues in Nabam Rebia judgement to larger bench
  • The five-judge bench referred certain issues related to its 2016 judgment in the Nabam Rebia case to a larger bench.
  • One of the issues is whether a notice for removal of a Speaker would restrict the powers of the Speaker to issue disqualification notices to MLAs.

 

---

Q1) What is 10th schedule of Indian constitution?

The 10th Schedule of the Indian Constitution is commonly known as the Anti-Defection Law. It was added to the Constitution by the 52nd Amendment Act, 1985 to address the issue of defections by legislators in India. The main objective of the 10th Schedule is to curb political defections by making it illegal for legislators to switch their party affiliation after being elected to the Parliament or State Legislature. 

 

Q2) What is the role of a whip in a political party?

In a political party, a Whip is a member of the party who is appointed to ensure discipline and loyalty among the party's legislators in the parliament or legislature. The main role of a Whip is to maintain party unity and ensure that the members vote according to the party's stance on legislative issues. The Whip is responsible for communicating the party's position on various legislative matters to the members and ensuring that they attend the parliament or legislature and vote in line with the party's stance.

 

---

Source: From disqualification of MLAs to governor’s role: What SC said in ruling on Sena tussle | Indian Express | The Hindu | Live Law