![]() ![]() But how could I ask for the vote of confidence of the very same ‘traitors’ who had betrayed me?” Thackeray said: “Maybe my decision was erroneous. Soon after the Supreme Court verdict, former CM Uddhav Thackeray asked how he could “seek the vote of confidence from ‘traitors’ who had betrayed”. ‘I could not seek trust vote from traitors’ Shiv Sena (UBT) President and former Chief Minister Uddhav Thackeray said that the Supreme Court verdict has exposed the role of the Governor, the Election Commission of India and the current regime, here on Thursday. Verdict has ‘exposed’ Governor, ECI role: Thackeray On a specific query to his status, Gogawale said that the SC has only made an observation of his appointment as the whip, it’s not the judgement.IANS The apex court has asked the speaker to decide the disqualification of the MLAs.īharat Gogawale, the whip of Shiv Sena headed by chief minister Eknath Shinde said that he would first read the entire SC judgement before commenting. The apex court stated that the speaker’s decision to appoint Gogawale (supported by the Shinde faction) as the whip of the Shiv Sena party was illegal. The top court pronounced its judgment on the political crisis in Maharashtra in connection with the rebellion by Shiv Sena leader Eknath Shinde and other MLAs, leading to the fall of Maha Vikas Aghadi government led by Uddhav Thackeray. The bench said neither the Constitution nor the law empowers the Governor to enter the political arena and play a role either in inter-party or intra-party disputes. The bench noted that Devendra Fadanvis and independent MLAs also didn’t move a no confidence motion and the Governor’s exercise of discretion was not in accordance with the law. The court said the Governor had no objective material to doubt the confidence of the Maha Vikas Aghadi (MVA) government and to call for a floor test. The bench said the lack of security to MLAs (Eknath Shinde faction) is not a reason to conclude that a government has fallen and it was nothing, but an extraneous reason to be relied upon by the Governor. The top court held that the Maharashtra Governor erred in concluding that Uddhav Thackeray had lost the majority in the House. The bench noted that the petitioners argued for restoring the status quo ante, however, Thackeray did not face the floor test. The bench made it clear that had Thackeray refrained from resigning, it could have reinstated him, but the court can’t quash a resignation. ![]() The top court also held that the Governor erred in concluding that Uddhav Thackeray had lost the majority in the House.Ī five-judge bench headed by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud said the court cannot quash the resignation submitted by Thackrey. ![]() The Supreme Court (SC) on Thursday said that had Uddhav Thackeray refrained from resigning as the chief minister of Maharashtra, the court could have reinstated him, but the court cannot quash a resignation. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |