The Supreme Court is likely to pronounce, on May 11, its judgement on the political crisis in Maharashtra over the rebellion by Shiv Sena leader Eknath Shinde and other MLAs, leading to the fall of the Maha Vikas Aghadi government led by Uddhav Thackeray.
A five-judge Constitution bench of CJI Chandrachud and Justices M R Shah, Krishna Murari, Hima Kohli and P S Narasimha had on March 16 reserved its judgements on a batch of petitions filed by both sides.
It is also to be noted that Justice Shah is set to superannuate on May 15.
After the top court had on June 29, 2022, refused to stay the Governor’s direction to the then Chief Minister Thackeray to take floor test, he preferred to resign, paving the way for Shinde to come to power in Maharashtra in alliance with the BJP.
Senior advocates A M Singhvi, Kapil Sibal, Devadatt Kamat and advocate Amit Anand Tiwari appeared for the Thackeray group.
Shinde'a side was represented by senior advocates Neeraj Kishan Kaul, Harish Salve, Mahesh Jethmalani and advocate Abhikalp Pratap Singh.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta represented the office of the governor in the matter. The hearing in the matter, which commenced on February 21, continued for nine-long days.
The matter before the court related to the power of the Speaker on disqualification proceedings against rebel MLAs and the Governor's decision to invite Shinde to form the government.
On February 22, the top court had refused a plea by Thackeray's group to stay the Election Commission's February 17 order recognising Eknath Shinde's faction as Shiv Sena and allotting it 'bow and arrow' symbol.
A three-judge bench had on August 23, 2022, referred the matter to the Constitution bench after framing the first issue of whether notice for removal of a Speaker restricts him from continuing with disqualification proceedings under the Tenth Schedule of the Constitution, as held by this court in Nabam Rabia case.
Thackeray faction had also asked the Supreme Court to refer the 2016 five-judge judgement of the Naban Rabia case, which restricted the power of the Speaker to decide disqualification petitions if a resolution seeking his removal was pending, to a seven-judge bench.