Thackeray and Shinde grew bolder; Supreme Court likely to give important decision today A to Z Counsel

New Delhi : The three-day long struggle for power in the state that broke out after the Shiv Sena split under the leadership of former Chief Minister Uddhav Thackeray ended on Thursday. But, under the leadership of Chief Justice Dhananjay Chandrachud, the incident was kept out of focus. After arguments on behalf of the Thackeray group and the Shinde group, this case should be sent to a large bench of seven judges to reconsider the decision of the Supreme Court in 2016 in the case of Nabam Rabia, and there is no possibility of giving the verdict in the next hearing.

Chief Justice Chandrachud and Justice M.R. Shah, Justice. Krishna Murari, Justice. Hima Kohli and Ny. P.S. What is the need for reconsideration of Nabam Rebia Nikala, before setting aside the incident or setting aside the judgment of Narasimha? Yavril rationalisthi akla. It would have been said that if the no-confidence motion against the concerned Speaker is pending, then the decision regarding the disqualification of the MLA is pending.

In the latest hearing, Thackeray’s lawyer argued that the case of power struggle in the state should be sent to a larger bench for reconsideration; There is no need to do so since the decision has not been implemented. Thackeray would have got the chief minister’s resignation before facing the trust issue. That’s why they are responsible for the fall of the government,’ said Shinde on behalf of Gatachya.

‘Without concrete facts regarding any reconsideration regarding Nabam Rabia’s removal, can the bench take action? Or the Speaker’s resolution in the matter was not tested in the hall and the voting pattern did not come to the fore,’ observed Chief Justice Chandrachud on Thursday.

Senior advocates Mahesh Jethmalani, Maninder Singh and Siddharth Bhatnagar, while arguing for the Bharatiya Janata Party MLAs, reiterated that there is no need to reconsider Nabam Rebia’s infallible attitude.

Senior jurist Harish Salve and N. Shinde Gatta. Of. Kaul; Also, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, who argued on behalf of the Governor, has lodged a protest against sending the case to a larger bench.

Senior jurist Kapil Sibal and Abhishek Manu Singhvi argued on behalf of the Shiv Sena-Maha Vikas Aghadi. Sibal requested to apply the meaning of the 10th schedule of the state, if a government should not be imposed. Till the decision on the petition of disqualification, the elected government should run.

Referring to the state split that took place in Govt last year, Sibal said that when the Govt government came to power, the concerned MLAs joined the second party (BJP) and started a merger dispute.