Shiv Sena Case Supreme Court | SUBHASH DESAI VS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, GOVERNOR OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

Shiv Sena Case Supreme Court | SUBHASH DESAI VS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,  GOVERNOR OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

Landmark Cases of India / सुप्रीम कोर्ट के ऐतिहासिक फैसले

1

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

    WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 493/2022 

SUBHASH DESAI       …PETITIONER(S)

VERSUS 

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, 

GOVERNOR OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.            …RESPONDENT(S)

With

W.P.(C) No.469/2022

W.P.(C) No.468/2022

W.P.(C) No.470/2022

W.P.(C) No.479/2022

W.P.(C) No.538/2022

ORDER

1. We have heard learned senior counsels appearing on both

sides and perusing the material available on record. 

2. This Court is of opinion that the present batch of petitions

raise important constitutional questions relating to interpretation

of Schedule X of the Constitution pertaining to disqualification, as

well as the powers of the Speaker and the Governor and the power

of judicial review thereof. 

3. At the outset, it may be necessary to highlight one particular

question raised in these batch of matters relating to the power of

the   Speaker/Deputy   Speaker   to   initiate   disqualification

2

proceedings, when proceedings for removal from the said office has

been initiated against them. In Nabam Rebia & Bamang Felix v.

Deputy   Speaker,   Arunachal   Pradesh   Legislative   Assembly,

(2016) 8 SCC 1, a Constitution bench of this Court held as follows:

“193….We   are,   therefore,   of   the   view   that

constitutional   purpose   and   constitutional   harmony

would   be   maintained   and   preserved,   if   a   Speaker

refrains   from   adjudication   of   a   petition   for

disqualification under the Tenth Schedule, whilst his

own position, as the Speaker, is under challenge. This

would also, allow the two provisions [Article 179(c) and

the   Tenth   Schedule]   to   operate   in   their   individual

constitutional   space,   without   encroaching   on   the

other.”

4. We may  prima facie  observe that the proposition of law laid

down by the Constitution bench in Nebam Rebia (supra), stands

on contradictory reasoning, which requires gap filling to uphold the

constitutional morality. As such, this question needs a reference to

a Constitution bench for the requisite gap filling exercise to be

conducted.

  

5. Further, these matters merit reference under Article 145(3) of

the Constitution to a 5­Judge bench as they raise other substantial

questions of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution, which

are:

a. Whether notice for removal of a Speaker restricts him

from continuing with disqualification proceedings under

3

Tenth   Schedule   of   the   Constitution,   as   held   by   this

Court in Nebam Rebia (supra)?

b. Whether a petition under Article 226 or Article 32 lies,

inviting a decision on a disqualification petition by the

High Courts or the Supreme Court, as the case may be?

c. Can   a  Court   hold   that   a  member  is  “deemed”  to   be

disqualified,   by   virtue   of   his/her   actions,   absent   a

decision by the Speaker?

d. What is the status of proceedings in the House during

the   pendency   of   disqualification   petitions   against   the

members? 

e.  If the decision of a Speaker that a member has incurred

disqualification under the Tenth Schedule relates back

to the date of the action complained of, then what is the

status   of   proceedings   that   took   place   during   the

pendency of a disqualification petition?

f. What is the impact of the removal of Paragraph 3 of the

Tenth Schedule? 

g. What   is   the   scope   of   the   power   of   the   Speaker   to

determine   the   Whip   and   the   leader   of   the   house

legislature party? What is the interplay of the same with

respect to the provisions of the Tenth Schedule?

4

h. Are intra­party decisions amenable to judicial review?

What is the scope of the same?

i. What   is   the   extent   of   discretion   and   power   of   the

Governor to invite a person to form the Government, and

whether the same is amenable to judicial review? 

j. What   is   the   scope   of   the   powers   of   the   Election

Commission of India with respect to determination of a

split within a party?

6. The papers may be placed before the Hon’ble the Chief Justice

for appropriate orders, immediately. 

...........................CJI.

(N.V. RAMANA)

      

 ...........................J.

(KRISHNA MURARI)

...........................J.

(HIMA KOHLI)

NEW DELHI;

AUGUST 23, 2022.