Manas Dasgupta
NEW DELHI, Sept 18: Coming hard on the Maharashtra speaker Rahul Narwekar for dragging his feet on the disqualification petitions of the Shiv Sena members following the split in the party, the Supreme Court on Monday directed him to finalise his decisions of the petitions in a time-bound manner.
Recalling that in May the apex court had asked the speaker to decide the petitions “within a reasonable time,” the three-judge bench headed by the Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud expressed concern over the inordinate delay and directed the speaker to fix a schedule for hearing the disqualification petitions arising out of the rift between the Eknath Shinde- and Uddhav Thackeray-led factions of the Shiv Sena.
The court warned Mr Narwekar he could not continue to drag his feet – having already been given nearly five months – and demanded to know what action had been taken following the court’s May 11 judgement, in which he had been told to rule on the petitions within a “reasonable time”.
The bench told Solicitor General Tushar Mehta – appearing for Mr Narwekar – “Mr SG, he has to decide. He can’t do this (keep delaying the decision). What did the Speaker do after the May 11 judgement by (this) court?” This time the court left no room for interpretation of “reasonable time” and in its order said, “We direct that (the) Speaker shall hear the matter (of disqualification) no later than a period of one week.”
The court also sought a proposed timeline of the hearing from Mr Narwekar and reminded him the office of the Speaker of the Maharashtra Assembly had to follow the dignity of the Supreme Court. The court then listed the matter for its hearing in two weeks’ time.
The Supreme Court’s strong comments today came as it heard a petition by the Uddhav Thackeray faction urging it to direct Mr Narwekar to take an early decision on the petitions. A total of 34 – filed by both sides – seeking disqualification of 56 MLAs, including Chief Minister Shinde, are pending.
Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for the petitioner, told the court today’s petition had been filed after alleged prolonged inaction from the Speaker following the May 11 order. Mr Sibal said the September 14 hearing of the disqualification petitions was only after the court listed his petition. Mr Narwekar began hearing disqualification petitions last week but only for a few hours before Shinde faction lawyers claimed they had not received some documents and it was postponed.
Mr Sibal called the disqualification hearings as “farce”. Mr Mehta hit back objecting to Mr Sibal’s attack on the Speaker but the Chief Justice interrupted, pointing out, “It appears nothing has happened.”
A Constitution Bench of the court had refused to interfere with the disqualification petitions and also said Eknath Shinde would continue as Chief Minister of Maharashtra at least till the disqualification petitions were decided.
In May, the Constitution Bench had declared as wrong the June 2022 decision of then governor Bhagat Singh Koshyari to ask Uddhav to face a floor test. However, the bench did not order status quo ante in Maharashtra or revive Thackeray’s government because he resigned from the chief minister’s post, without facing the floor test. In this judgment, the bench had also directed Speaker Rahul Narwekar to decide on the disqualification petitions, but refrained from fixing a deadline for the same.
On Monday, the top court observed that a Speaker is a “tribunal” under the Tenth Schedule of the Constitution — which deals with procedure on disqualification of lawmakers — and is, therefore, amenable to judicial review. It further said the Speaker cannot delay disqualification petition proceedings pending for an indefinite period and that it has to “abide by the dignity of this court.”
Infighting in the undivided Sena last year had ultimately toppled the Maha Vikas Aghadi (MVA) government. The Shinde faction — with support from majority of Sena MLAs — then formed the new government with BJP, after Thackeray resigned as CM following Koshyari’s mandate to him to face a floor test and the top court’s refusal to grant an interim stay on it. This led to then deputy Speaker Narhari Zirwal issuing disqualification notices against the rebel MLAs. Shinde then moved court challenging the petitions, following which the Thackeray faction moved court too, questioning Koshyari’s decision to call for a trust vote, the swearing-in of Shinde as CM and election of Speaker Narwekar.
The bench’s Monday observations and order came on a petition filed by Sunil Prabhu — an MLA from the Uddhav faction of the Sena — to expedite the disposal of the disqualification proceedings. The petition claimed that the proceedings before the Speaker had become a farce since there was no action after notices were issued on 4 July.
It was further argued that members of the Thackeray group had given three representations following the May order, urging the Speaker to fast-track the hearing in the petitions.
“The (May) order of this court requires the Speaker to decide the disqualification petitions within a reasonable period. While this court is cognizant of the need to ensure a sense of comity between the Speaker who is the head of Legislative Assembly, we would equally expect deference and dignity to the directions issued and exercised using Constitutional power,” the court said in its order.
It “directed” the Speaker to complete the records in the case within a one week and decide a schedule for its hearing. The court said in the meantime, soft copies of the necessary documents — annexures filed along with the disqualification petitions — shall be served to the MLAs facing disqualification, in line with the rules.
According to the rules, Prabhu has contended, the Speaker has to provide these documents to the respondents.
As the court agreed to hear the petition after two weeks, it asked solicitor general Tushar Mehta, who represented the Speaker, to apprise the bench about the time schedule fixed by his client.
Tushar Mehta contested Sunil Prabhu’s version of the proceedings and objected to him “ridiculing” the Speaker’s office. “It pains when a constitutional functionary is painted in this manner. There are several causes of action and several petitions filed before the Speaker. He has demarcated the petitions in groups,” Mehta said.
He read out a note on behalf of the Speaker to answer the court’s query on what steps were taken after the SC delivered its May order.
After making his submission, Mehta emphasised that one constitutional body was seeking answers from the other and that the moot question arising out of the petition is whether a Speaker’s office can be asked to submit its day-to-day functioning before the court. To this, the bench replied: “He is a tribunal under the tenth schedule and all tribunals are amenable to jurisdiction of the top court.”
The bench reminded Mehta that due to similar submissions, the Constitution Bench had held itself back from issuing a deadline to the Speaker for deciding the disqualification petitions. “We did not set down a three-month requirement, but mentioned a reasonable time. Equally, the speaker has to abide by the dignity of the Supreme Court. We are way past four months and we are still on the stage of notices,” the CJI said.
Earlier, Prabhu’s counsel Kapil Sibal argued that the Speaker delayed the proceedings to complete housekeeping issues. He said the Speaker wrote to the Election Commission, asking for a copy of the original constitution of the Shiv Sena on 7 June, after his client sent him three representations with a request to expedite the disposal of the disqualification petitions.
A month later, the Speaker issued notices on all the petitions, except a few, which was done on 27 July. Meanwhile, the Election Commission responded on 22 July. Finally, Sibal said, the hearing was fixed for 14 September, only after Prabhu’s petition was filed in SC for quick disposal of the disqualification petitions.
“On that day, the Speaker noted that he would have to verify whether the respondents have received annexures filed with the disqualification petitions. This was done even as it is the Speaker who is supposed to provide these documents to the other side. After noting this, the Speaker passed other procedural directions and said the matter would be heard in due course,” Sibal said, adding no date was specified for the next hearing.
Earlier on Monday, Sanjay Raut, a senior leader with the Sena’s Thackeray faction (now called Shiv Sena UBT), had accused Mr Narwekar of supporting an “unconstitutional government” by delaying action. “Despite a clear directive from the Supreme Court – referring to the May 11 ruling – the Speaker is wasting time when it comes to deciding on disqualification petitions,” Mr Raut said. He also accused lawmakers who had jumped ship of doing so to get “relief from central probe agencies” as they “control certain sugar mills facing financial irregularities and corruption case.”