‘Didn’t act on insurgent Shiv Sena MLAs’ discover as its veracity not ascertained’: Maharashtra Deputy Speaker to SC

By PTI

NEW DELHI: Maharashtra Assembly Deputy Speaker Narhari Zirwal has instructed the Supreme Court that he didn’t take motion on a discover, allegedly despatched by insurgent Shiv Sena MLAs headed by Eknath Shinde, in search of his elimination as deputy speaker because the veracity of the communication couldn’t be ascertained.

He additionally instructed the apex courtroom that the discover in search of his elimination was not a sound below Article 179(C) of the Constitution as such a discover can solely be given when the Assembly is in session.

The submission was made in response to a plea filed by Shinde and others difficult the disqualification notices issued by the Deputy Speaker below the Tenth Schedule of the Constitution on grounds together with defection.

The Deputy Speaker stated the discover in search of his elimination, which was allegedly signed by 39 MLAs, was handed over to the workplace by an unknown particular person and an electronic mail was despatched from the deal with of advocate Vishal Acharya, who isn’t a member of the Legislative Assembly.

“As the master of House, it was my duty to verify and ascertain the authenticity as well as genuineness of the purported notice seeking my removal. This is particularly more relevant when only the previous day some MLAs from Shiv Sena had met me personally for recognition of Ajay Chaudhari as the legislature party leader,” the affidavit filed by the Deputy Speaker stated.

Zirwal instructed the highest courtroom that except he was happy that this was not a “mischief” by somebody “I was duty-bound and entitled to take a view. There was no question of taking the same on record.”

The Deputy Speaker additionally acknowledged the Nabam Rabia judgement was not relevant to the current case as there was no legitimate discover for elimination as contemplated below Article 179(C) of the Constitution.

On the problem of granting solely 48 hours to insurgent MLAs to reply to disqualification discover, the Deputy Speaker stated there was no illegality in it and the timeline for submitting of reply is only discretionary.

“There is absolutely no illegality in 48 hours being given to the Petitioners to respond to the disqualification petitions. First of all 48 hours’ notice was given in the first instance. The Petitioner never approached me and sought time.”

“That apart, this Hon’ble Court in Shrimant Balasaheb apart from holding that the timeline for filing of reply is purely discretionary, has categorically also held that the number of days is immaterial and what matters is whether the respondent has been given sufficient and reasonable time to file their replies,” the affidavit stated.

The prime courtroom on June 27 had stored in abeyance the disqualification proceedings earlier than the Deputy Speaker of the state Assembly until July 11, and in addition sought responses from the state authorities and others on their pleas questioning the legality of notices in search of their disqualification.

Directing the then Uddhav Thackeray-led Maha Vikas Aghadi (MVA) authorities to guard the life, liberty, and property of the 39 insurgent Shiv Sena MLAs, headed by Shinde, and their relations, the highest courtroom stated the rebels might file replies to the disqualification notices until 5:30 pm on July 12.

Besides Shinde, the opposite 15 MLAs are Bharat Gogawale, Prakash R Surve, Tanhaji Jaywant Savant, Mahesh S Shinde, Abdul Sattar, Sandeepan A Bhumre, Sanjay P Sirhsat, Yamini Y Jadhav, Anil Okay Babar, Latabai C Sonawane, Ramesh N Bornare, Sanjay B Raimulkar, Chimanrao R Patil, Balaji D Kalyankar and Balaji P Kinilkar.