Maharashtra Crisis: 8 Major Points made at court
Maharashtra Crisis: A writ petition has been filed by Shiv Sena, NCP and Congress against the dramatic decision of the Maharashtra Governor to invite BJP to form government. In a special hearing on Sunday a three Judge Bench of the Supreme Court comprising of Justices NV Ramana, Ashok Bhushan and Sanjiv Khanna started the hearing on the matter.
Arguments placed the Advocates in Favour of CM Fadnavis and Deputy CM Ajit Pawar
- Mukul Rohatgi appearing for BJP, citing Article 361 said that the President and Governor shall not be answerable to court. Action of Governor is immune and from Shamsher Singh case, his power to appoint is his individual discretion not amenable to judicial review.
- Placing the copy of Governor’s decision before court, SG Tushar Mehta appearing on behalf of Central Government said that the Governor has invited all the parties for government formation and Presidents rule was imposed only after all of them failed. Solicitor General also argued that the Governor does not need to do a “roving inquiry”, after submitting letters of support to Court.
- Mukul Rohatgi arguing in for Devendra Fadnavis said that the pre poll ally left so President rule was imposed. Rohatgi mentions that the present case is different from 2018 Karnataka case. Governor gave chance to all parties. He exercised his discretion fairly. When to hold the floor test is also the discretion of the governor. Court cannot interfere with house procedure regulated by rules of assembly.
- Maninder Singh for Ajit Pawar quoted, “I acted as the Chief of NCP Legislative Party on Nov 22 (while extending support to Fadnavis). And Governor exercised discretion based on that.”
Arguments Placed by Petitioner Advocates
- On Sunday, Kapil Sibal arguing on behalf of Shiv Sena said that the act of Governor revoking the rule is malafide contrary to all the rules established by the Court. He said that President Rule being revoked at 5.15AM and at 7am swearing in two people without Cabinet meet was shocking in democracy.
- Abhishek Manu Singhvi appearing for NCP,pressing for the floor test to be held within 24 hours, said that the NCP had a meeting removing Ajit Pawar with 41 signatures out of 54. Therefore, swearing of CM and Dy CM was a provocation.
- On Monday, Kapil Sibal termed the whole exercise of revocation of President’s rule to have mala fides. “What was the emergency to revoke President’s rule at 5.17 am and swear in CM at 8 am.”
- Abhishek Manu Singhvi pressing for floor test to be held tomorrow said, BJP has been “too clever by half”. There is no covering letter saying that NCP MLAs support BJP. It’s a list of 54 signatures. This is fraud on democracy.
Supreme Court on both the days did not order the floor test. On first day it order SG Tushar Mehta to to produce letter presented by CM Devendra Fadnavis to the Maharashtra governor claiming to form government along with the letter of support of NCP MLAs under Ajit Pawar. The petitioners sought a direction from the Court to the Governor to invite the alliance, which has the support of more than 144 MLAs, to form the government in Maharashtra. However, the Court on Monday reserved the order for next hearing to be held on Tuesday to end the Maharashtra Crisis.
Jharkhand and Karnataka Assembly Elections begins from 30th November. We have launched our Political Prediction Game on upcoming Election. Join the Game and predict the outcome of Election and get a chance to win Exciting Rewards.
Maharashtra Crisis: 8 Points Placed by both Petitioner and Respondent in Supreme Court