E-Paper
SC gives no interim relief to Sena UBT over MPs' merger with Shinde camp, says will issue notice
The Supreme Court issued notice but refused interim relief on Sena (UBT)'s plea challenging the Speaker's recognition of six MPs' merger.
The Supreme Court on Wednesday refused to grant interim relief to the Shiv Sena (Uddhav Balasaheb Thackeray) against Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla’s decision recognising the merger of six of its MPs with the Eknath Shinde-led Shiv Sena but agreed to examine the legality of the move by issuing notice on the party’s petition.
A bench of justices PS Narasimha and Alok Aradhe declined to stay the Speaker’s circular reflecting the revised party strength in Lok Sabha for the time being, despite Sena (UBT)’s contention that the decision had paralysed its functioning during the ongoing monsoon session of Parliament. The court agreed to hear the challenge and sought responses from the officer of the Speaker and the six MPs.
Also read: Shiv Sena (UBT) moves Supreme Court against Speaker’s nod to merger of six MPs with Shinde camp
Sena (UBT) alleges unconstitutional merger
Appearing for Sena (UBT), senior advocates Abhishek M Singhvi and Devadatt Kamat argued that the matter raised significant constitutional issues concerning the anti-defection law and parliamentary democracy. “This raises important questions of constitutional morality. Six MPs out of nine were elected on my party symbol. No disqualification proceedings are pending. The question of merger has not arisen as per the judgment in Subhash Desai,” Singhvi submitted.
Kamat contended that the Speaker recognised a merger without lawful basis and pointed to the Lok Sabha Secretariat’s circular issued after the decision. “See the circular please. It says, ‘Consequent upon the change in party affiliation of six members of Shiv Sena UBT, revised party position...’ We don’t even know whether the Speaker has signed any order. I had nine MPs. Now I have been reduced to three. These six have unilaterally decided,” Kamat argued. The bench sought to ascertain the core grievance. “Do you mean there has been no merger?” justice Narasimha asked.
Kamat answered in the affirmative and pressed for an interim stay of the circular, submitting that the developments had been timed to coincide with the ongoing Parliament session.
“I am praying for an interim order. The whole thing has been orchestrated for the Parliament session. Your Lordships may take it up next week,” said Kamat, adding that “all these get defeated by the process of time.”
Court declines interim relief
The bench, however, declined to intervene at this stage. “We will issue notice. No interim,” retorted the bench.
When Kamat requested that notice also be issued on the interim application because of the urgency, the bench replied that the matter would be listed after next week. During the hearing, the bench referred to the Supreme Court’s decision in the Amar Singh case and observed that the issue had already been referred to a larger bench and remained undecided since 2017.
Also read: 6 UBT MPs’ merger with Shinde Sena gets Lok Sabha Speaker’s approval
Six MPs defend Speaker's decision
Senior advocate Neeraj Kishan Kaul, appearing for the six MPs who defected to the Shinde faction, opposed the plea, submitting that the petitioner’s contentions regarding the legislative party and merger stood answered by previous judgments of the Supreme Court.
The petition challenges Speaker Om Birla’s decision, taken ahead of the Monsoon Session, recognising the merger of six Sena (UBT) MPs with the Shiv Sena led by Maharashtra deputy CM Shinde. The six MPs are Sanjay Deshmukh (Yavatmal-Washim), Sanjay Jadhav (Parbhani), Sanjay Dina Patil (Mumbai North East), Nagesh Patil Ashtikar (Hingoli), Omraje Nimbalkar (Dharashiv) and Bhausaheb Wakchaure (Shirdi).
The strength of the Shinde-led Sena in the Lok Sabha then increased from seven to 13 MPs, while the Thackeray-led faction was reduced from nine to three.
Google Trends
According to Google Trends, the search term "Om Birla" was trending on Thursday amid developments in Parliament during the Monsoon Session. The highest search interest came from Delhi, followed by Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh.
