After the result of the New Delhi Legislative Council, Eknath Shinde's revolt in the state has come as a big shock to the Mahavikas Aghadi government including Shiv Sena. In the petition, 50 MLAs of Mavia, including Shinde, rushed to the Supreme Court saying that they were withdrawing their support to the government. Shiv Sena sent a notice to disqualify 16 MLAs including Eknath Shinde. Against this, Shinde knocked on the doors of the Supreme Court.
In today's hearing of the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court has issued a notice to the Shiv Sena party chief, the state government, the Legislative Secretariat and the Central Government to reply within 5 days. The apex court allowed 16 MLAs to file their reply till the hearing is completed. The Supreme Court has said that no action can be taken against the Shinde group MLAs till the next hearing on July 11. By July 11, 5.30 am, 16 MLAs have been allowed to express their views.
What exactly happened in the Supreme Court?
Supreme Court: Why did you come here without going to the High Court?
Shinde group lawyer: We are getting threats of death, the vice president is not listening to our side. So here we are.
Supreme Court - How can you question the authority of the Vice President?
Shinde Group Advocate - It is wrong for the Vice President to give us notice.
Supreme Court: Why are you afraid of floor tests?
Shinde group lawyer: First prove that the majority of MLAs support the Assembly Vice President. Why do the Assembly Vice Presidents who have a majority fear a floor test? If 16 MLAs are suspended as per the decision given by the Deputy Speaker of the Assembly, there will be a constitutional crisis in the state. Therefore, it should be decided to remove the Vice President.
The Shinde group filed the Arunachal Pradesh case against Nabam Rebia in the Supreme Court. If they do not trust the vice president, they will have to prove a majority. The Shinde group's counsel sought cancellation of the disqualification notice issued by Jirwal.
Abhishek Manu Singhvi, a lawyer for the Shinde group, was speaking in between. Therefore, the Supreme Court said, "Let them complete it before the court strikes Singhvi, then we will hear your side."
MLA Abhishek Manu Singhvi had earlier asked the vice-president to reply to the notice, but people have come to the court without giving it. He also claimed that such incidents have not happened in history till date. Referring to the decision in the Manipur MLAs' case, he said the court has limited reasons to intervene when the Speaker disqualifies the MLAs.
If Justice Kant's dismissal of the Speaker is under consideration under Section 179 (c), are such Vice-Chairmen able to take a decision as per the 10th Schedule? Has this matter been considered in any case?
Abhishek Manu Singhvi asked the court, what is the procedure for giving notice to MLAs? Tell me, is the process followed or not? Say it too. Manu Singhvi was trying to convince the court by giving several pieces of evidence.
Shinde group lawyer Neeraj Kishan Kaul: the vice-president of the assembly, sent a notice and gave only 2 days. The procedure in the notice case was not followed properly. The removal of the vice-president should be decided first.