Maharashtra Assembly Speaker Rahul Narwekar said on May 13 that it was not possible to hurry the process of deciding on a political party, the whip and the hearing of all the disqualification petitions, and that everyone had to be given a fair chance.
On May 11, the Supreme Court of India said that Mr. Narwekar’s decision of cancelling the approval of Ajay Choudhari (of Maha Vikas Aghadi) as the Leader of the Shiv Sena Legislature Party while authorising the appointment of Mr. Shinde, was “contrary to law”.
The court also directed Mr. Narwekar to recognise the whip and leader who are duly authorised by the Shiv Sena political party, and decide on the disqualification proceedings (by 16 members of the Legislative Assembly), within a “reasonable period”.
Fair chance
Talking to The Hindu, Mr. Narwekar enlisted the questions before him. He said, “The moot question is to first decide as to who represents the political party. On that basis, I will have to decide who the whip is, in accordance with the political party. Then I will have to get into the merits of multiple disqualification petitions.”
“All the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure will be applicable— leading of evidence, examination of the chief, cross-examinations, verification and so on. Only then will I be able to come to a decision after giving everyone a fair chance,” he added.
“The hearing will start soon. The Election Commission of India took almost four months while the courts took around nine months. We cannot hurry the process,” he continued.
The apex court on May 11 had held Mr. Nawekar’s decision of recognising Bharat Gogawale (of Eknath Shinde camp) as the new chief whip “illegal”, and stated that Sunil Prabhu (of the MVA) was appointed by the political party Shiv Sena but not the Legislature Party as the chief whip.
On June 21, 2022, Mr. Shinde, Leader of the Shiv Sena in the Maharashtra Assembly suddenly left Mumbai with many other Sena MLAs for Surat. This rebel group later went to Guwahati.
Following the disqualification, proceedings were issued against the first batch of 16 MLAs and a notice was served on them. This group was granted 48 hours’ time to respond to the said notice.
The next day, the group led by Mr. Shinde filed a petition in the Supreme Court challenging the proceedings against the 16 MLAs.
