The Supreme Court on Friday declined to refer the cases related to the Maharashtra political crisis to a larger seven-judge bench for reconsideration of a 2016 Nabam Rebia judgment on powers of Assembly Speakers to deal with disqualification pleas.

A five-judge Constitution bench headed by Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud, which also comprises justices M R Shah, Krishna Murari, Hima Kohli and P S Narasimha said whether the 2016 Nabam Rebia judgement requires to be referred to a larger seven-judge bench or not can only be decided along with a hearing on the merits of the Maharashtra politics case.

The top court said, "Issue of reference cannot be decided in isolation without facts of the case. Issue of reference will be decided only with merits of the case." It posted the next hearing of Maharashtra political crisis cases to February 21. "Consequently, hearing on merits of the case will be held on Tuesday, 10:30 am," said the bench.

Reacting on Supreme Court's decision, Maharashtra CM Eknath Shinde said, "We've full faith in the judiciary. In a democracy coming to power with a majority has huge value. We are working for the betterment of people. Hence we want the judiciary to decide on the basis of merits."

Also Read: Maharashtra Budget session kicks off on Feb 27, presentation scheduled for March 9

On Thursday, the top court reserved its verdict after hearing the arguments from rival Shiv Sena groups.

Senior advocates Kapil Sibal and A M Singhvi, appearing for the Uddhav Thackeray faction of the Shiv Sena, submitted that there is an imperative need to reconsider the law laid down in the Nabam Rebia case and had sought reference of the cases to a seven-judge bench for a re-look at the Nabam Rebia judgement.

The Uddhav Thackeray faction of the Shiv Sena told the Supreme Court that the constitutional issues that the June 2022 Maharashtra political crisis raised were not merely academic as they will arise time and again when elected governments are toppled.

"This is not about today. This is about tomorrow. It will arise time and again. This issue will arise time and again. Elected governments will be toppled. No democracy in the world allows this to happen. So please don't say this is academic. I beg of you. Do not allow Tenth schedule to topple an elected government. It is not just a narrow interpretation," Sibal told the bench.

The 10th Schedule of the Constitution provides for the prevention of defection of the elected and nominated members from their political party and contains stringent provisions against defections.

Senior advocates Harish Salve and N K Kaul, appearing for the party’s Eknath Shinde-led faction, had opposed the reference to a larger bench. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Maharashtra governor, had also opposed any move to refer the matter to a larger bench.

In 2016, a five-judge Constitution bench, while deciding the Nabam Rebia case of Arunachal Pradesh, had held that the assembly speaker cannot proceed with a plea for disqualification of MLAs if a prior notice seeking removal of the speaker is pending before the House.

The judgement had come to the rescue of the rebel MLAs led by Shinde, now the chief minister of Maharashtra. The Thackeray faction had sought their disqualification even while a notice of the Shinde group for the removal of Maharashtra Assembly Deputy Speaker Narhari Sitaram Zirwal, a Thackeray loyalist, was pending before the House.

With inputs from agencies.

Also Read: Maharashtra political crisis: SC to commence hearing pleas on Feb 14

First Published:Feb 17, 2023 12:15 PM IST