‘Rebia’ issue Kalicha! Need to reconsider the evacuation, inspection of the spot A to Z Counsel

New Delhi : During the hearing on the power struggle, the issue of ‘disqualification of MLAs of Shinde Group’ is very complex and eventful. It will have very serious consequences for politicians,’ saying, ‘Whether the bold decision of the Supreme Court in Asamatil Nabam Rabia case would have been worthy of decision in 2016, it needs to be reconsidered,’ such an important and suggestive observation Wednesday Mandalay.

Justice with Chief Justice Dhananjay Chandrachud regarding factionalism in Shiv Sena. M.R. Shah, Justice Krishna Murari, Justice. Hima Kohli, Justice. P.S. The hearing was held on Wednesday in front of a five-member bench comprising Narsingh. Shiv Sena’s Eknath Shinde protested against the issues of senior advocate Harish Salve, who sided with Gattachi. Yes, it is a difficult incident and it will have serious political consequences in both respects, said the witnesses.

Shiv Sena split after Shiv Sena leader Eknath Shinde formed the government with the help of BJP and 40 MLAs of Shiv Sena. Or, in the meantime, whether the hearing should be conducted by a five-judge bench as at present, as per the demand of the Thackeray faction, the question of whether to send it to a seven-judge bench is in front of the court.

Arguing on behalf of Uddhav Thackeray, senior lawyer Kapil Sibal demanded reconsideration of the decision in the Nabam Rabia case. Due to the withdrawal, the action of ineligibility against the defecting MLAs can be avoided. On this, the court stated that it was necessary to change the decision. For the year 2016, the decision would have already been made, we don’t want to do this, but if we change anything in it, there is a need to do more things, we are saying this, the court has made it clear. Regarding Nabam Rebia, both the views will have political serious consequences and both are not beneficial. So this is a difficult question to decide,’ said the bench.

Meanwhile, senior lawyers Harish Salve and Neeraj Kishan Kaul opposed the need for reconsideration by Shinde Gatta Baju Mandtana, Nabam Rebia Nikalachya. Also, the then Speaker of the Legislative Assembly himself would have faced the resolution to remove him. At that time it does not allow them to disqualify the MLAs. In such a situation, the Speaker himself does not get the approval of the House, till then the decision of disqualification should be taken, said Salve.

Whereas the governor has the right to call the session of the auditorium, then the speaker of the assembly does not. The Speaker conducts the business of the House. If Shinde Gatachiya 40 MLAs had submitted a motion of no confidence against the then Speaker, then according to the conscience of the members, they would not have had the moral right to run the hall. In such a situation, how is it possible to act against the ineligible MLAs,’ asked Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, ie, the Governor’s lawyer. He also said that the case against Nabam Rebia, Deputy Speaker of Arunachal Pradesh Legislative Assembly, has said that, if a motion for disqualification against the Speaker of the Legislative Assembly is pending, then ineligible action cannot be initiated against any MLA.