SC questions Governor's role in precipitating Maharashtra crisis

The Supreme Court on Wednesday questioned erstwhile Maharashtra Governor Bhagat Singh Koshyari's decision to call for trust vote in the Assembly, precipitating the fall of the Maha Vikas Aghadi government led by Uddhav Thackeray.

A five-judge bench presided over by Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud also sought to know as to what happened overnight after three years of happy marriage.

The bench, also comprising Justices M R Shah, Krishna Murari, Hima Kohli and PS Narasimha orally said that this is a very sad spectacle in our democracy and this is irrespective of the morality of Shiv Sena joining the alliance with Congress and NCP.

Read | Funds going to Shinde's MLAs, leaving BJP legislators unhappy, claims Ajit Pawar

Notably, on June 29, 2022, the top court had refused to stay the Maharashtra Governor's direction to hold a floor test in Maharashtra Assembly on June 30, in an endgame to the Uddhav Thackeray-led Maha Vikas Aghadi government, after a rebellion by Shinde and 48 other MLAs.

While hearing the matter, the court posed a series of tough questions to Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, asking if the governor can call for the trust vote, it was virtually breaking the party.

"Looking at it in hindsight, the then Shiv Sena headed by Uddhav Thackeray had lost the mathematical equation and they were not willing to disqualify the 39 rebel MLAs belonging to the Eknath Shinde group, as it would be to their disadvantage," the bench pointed out.

Read | Sena (UBT) dubs Maharashtra govt's Budget as 'gajar halwa'; says it shows false dreams to people by showering sops

The bench further said the governor should not have entered into any area which precipitated the fall of a government.

The Chief Justice orally observed that the governor must be conscious of the fact that his calling for a trust vote may lead to a situation, which could result in the toppling of a government. Citing differences on policy issues cited by the rebel MLAs, the Chief Justice asked Mehta, can the Governor merely say that you must prove your strength in the trust vote?

The court pointed out that in the Maha Vikas Aghadi, the rebel MLAs broke bread for three years with the Congress and NCP but wondered as to what happened overnight after three years of happy marriage.

To this, Mehta said that he cannot answer this, as that is a political debate.

Mehta said the Governor's primary responsibility is that a stable government continues and a democratically elected leader should continue to enjoy the confidence of the House throughout the tenure. Otherwise, there would be no accountability of the leader, he added.

The bench, however, said the Governor has to ask himself this question, 'what were you fellas doing for three years?'

It pointed out that if this situation were to occur a month after the election, then it would be different but they were together for three years.

Mehta, for his part, referred to the leader of the opposition's communication to the Governor and also the threats which were issued to the rebel Shiv Sena MLAs.

The bench pointed out that the governor had three things before him: one, the resolution by 34 MLAs saying that leadership would be with Eknath Shinde; two, the letter by MLAs about threats and; third the letter by the leader of the opposition. The Chief Justice said the leader of the opposition will always write to the Governor and the threat to security is not a ground for calling for a trust vote.

Mehta said that it was the Governor's responsibility to ensure that a stable government is in place. The bench replied that a government was functioning then and they can vote the leader out by saying that the leader is not holding the ethos of the party but can the Governor say that he will ask them to prove it now.