38.6c New Delhi, India, Monday, January 12, 2026
Top Stories Supreme Court
Political NEWS Legislative Corner Celebstreet International Videos
Subscribe Contact Us
close
Judiciary

Supreme Court to Review Plea Against Maharashtra Speaker's Decision on Mar 7

By Jhanak Sharma      01 March, 2024 05:47 PM      0 Comments
Supreme Court to Review Plea Against Maharashtra Speaker s Decision on Mar 7

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Friday agreed to hear on March 7 a plea by Shiv Shiva (UBT) questioning validity of Maharashtra Assembly Speaker Rahul Narwekars January 10 decision dismissing disqualification petitions filed against Chief Minister Eknath Shinde and other MLAs.

Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for the UBT group, mentioned the matter before a bench of Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud and Justices J B Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, which determined the date as March 7 for the hearing.

The court had on January 22 issued notice to Shinde and others. 

The plea filed by UBT group's Sunil Prabhu contended the Speaker's orders were unlawful and perverse and in the teeth of the Supreme Court's decision in the case of Subhash Desai Vs Governor of Maharashtra (2022).

On January 10, 2024, the Speaker dismissed all disqualification petitions and declared Shinde's group as real Shiv Sena.

The petitioner claimed the Speaker's judgments have not even considered the main undisputed event, i.e., the oath taking on June 30, 2022, which conclusively established that all their acts from June 21, 2022 were for the purpose of toppling the elected government in Maharashtra led by their own political party.

"There could not have been a clearer case of disqualification. Shinde met the Governor, and took oath as Chief Minister with support of the BJP on June 30, 2022, and all the respondent MLAs supported this decision, which itself amounted to voluntarily giving up membership of the political party," their plea said.

The UBT group said the Tenth Schedule is intended to disqualify legislators who act against their political party.

However, if majority of legislators are treated to be the political party, then the members of the actual political party become subject to the will of the majority of legislators. This is totally against the constitutional scheme, and is consequently liable to be set aside, the plea said.

In considering the majority of legislators as representing the will of the political party, the Speaker has in effect equated the legislature party with the political party, which is in the teeth of the law laid down by the apex court in Subhash Desais case, it said.

 



Share this article:

About:

Jhanak is a lawyer by profession and legal journalist by passion. She graduated at the top of her cl...Read more

Follow:
FacebookTwitterLinkedinInstagram


Leave a feedback about this
Related Posts
View All

Another CBI Officer Investigating Rakesh Asthana Moves SC Against Transfer, Makes Startling Revelations Another CBI Officer Investigating Rakesh Asthana Moves SC Against Transfer, Makes Startling Revelations

After A.K. Bassi, another CBI officer who was investigating corruption allegations against Special Director Rakesh Asthana moved the Supreme Court.

Ayodhya verdict: SC rules in favour of Ram Lalla, Sunni Waqf Board gets alternate land Ayodhya verdict: SC rules in favour of Ram Lalla, Sunni Waqf Board gets alternate land

SC bench led by CJI Ranjan Gogoi has allotted the dispute site to Ram Janmabhoomi Nyas, while directing the government to allot an alternate 5 acre land within Ayodhya to Sunni Waqf Board to build a mosque.

Supreme Court: Money Spent On Judiciary Less Than 1% In All States Except Delhi Supreme Court: Money Spent On Judiciary Less Than 1% In All States Except Delhi

The court guided all states to document their response to the commission's report within four weeks. If any of the states fail to file a response, it will be presumed that they have no objections to the recommendations made by the commission, the court said.

Supreme Court Top Panel Names Chief Justices for Bombay, Orissa and Meghalaya High Courts Supreme Court Top Panel Names Chief Justices for Bombay, Orissa and Meghalaya High Courts

On April 18, 2020, the Supreme Court Collegium recommended new Chief Justices for three High Courts. Justice Dipankar Datta was proposed as Chief Justice of the Bombay High Court, succeeding Justice B.P. Dharmadhikari. Justice Biswanath Somadder was nominated as Chief Justice of Meghalaya High Court, while Justice Mohammad Rafiq was recommended for transfer as Chief Justice of Orissa High Court.

TRENDING NEWS


TOP STORIES

wrong-bail-orders-alone-without-evidence-of-corruption-cannot-justify-removal-of-judicial-officer-sc
Trending Judiciary
Wrong Bail Orders Alone, Without Evidence of Corruption, Cannot Justify Removal of Judicial Officer: SC [Read Judgment]

Supreme Court rules that wrong bail orders alone cannot justify removal of a judicial officer without proof of corruption, misconduct, or extraneous considerations.

06 January, 2026 07:43 PM
divorced-muslim-woman-can-seek-maintenance-under-crpc-even-after-receiving-amount-under-muslim-women-protection-act-kerala-hc
Trending Judiciary
Divorced Muslim Woman Can Seek Maintenance Under CrPC Even After Receiving Amount Under Muslim Women Protection Act: Kerala HC [Read Order]

Kerala High Court holds that a divorced Muslim woman can claim maintenance under Section 125 CrPC even after receiving amounts under the 1986 Act.

06 January, 2026 08:19 PM
delhi-hc-full-bench-settles-bsf-seniority-dispute-rule-of-continuous-regular-appointment-prevails
Trending Judiciary
Delhi HC Full Bench Settles BSF Seniority Dispute; Rule of ‘Continuous Regular Appointment’ Prevails [Read Judgment]

Delhi High Court Full Bench rules BSF seniority is based on date of continuous regular appointment, rejecting claims for antedated seniority due to delayed joining.

06 January, 2026 08:45 PM
borrowers-cannot-invoke-writ-jurisdiction-to-compel-banks-to-extend-one-time-settlement-benefits-kerala-hc
Trending Judiciary
Borrowers Cannot Invoke Writ Jurisdiction to Compel Banks to Extend One-Time Settlement Benefits: Kerala HC [Read Judgment]

Kerala High Court holds borrowers cannot invoke writ jurisdiction to compel banks to grant One-Time Settlement benefits, as OTS is not a legal right.

07 January, 2026 09:22 PM

ADVERTISEMENT


Join Group

Signup for Our Newsletter

Get Exclusive access to members only content by email