A Bench led by CJI Surya Kant resumed hearing the Shiv Sena split case, in which the Uddhav Thackeray faction challenges the Maharashtra Speaker’s refusal to disqualify Eknath Shinde faction MLAs and the Election Commission’s recognition of the Shinde group as the Shiv Sena. Senior Advocate Neeraj Kishan Kaul argued that the split was in the political party itself. The hearing continues.
Hearing the Shiv Sena disqualification case, the Supreme Court asked whether it could itself declare Shinde-faction MLAs disqualified or only set aside the Speaker’s order and remand it. New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Wednesday, hearing the Uddhav Thackeray-led Shiv Sena’s challenge to the Maharashtra Speaker’s refusal to disqualify Eknath Shinde faction MLAs, asked whether […]
Arguing the Shiv Sena disqualification case, Kapil Sibal told the Supreme Court the Maharashtra Speaker “distorted” the Tenth Schedule by treating the legislative party as the political party. New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday resumed hearing the Uddhav Thackeray-led Shiv Sena’s challenge to the Maharashtra Speaker’s refusal to disqualify MLAs of the Eknath Shinde […]
Hearing Uddhav Thackeray’s challenge to the ECI recognising the Shinde faction as the Shiv Sena, CJI Surya Kant said the rule letting the ECI decide symbol disputes first “may need a relook.” New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Wednesday heard extensive arguments in Uddhav Thackeray’s challenge to the Election Commission of India’s decision recognising the […]
Uddhav Thackeray slammed the Maharashtra Special Public Security Bill, warning that “democracy is dying at the Supreme Court’s doorstep” and appealed to the CJI to safeguard people’s rights. Opposition leaders and activists unitedly vowed to challenge the controversial law in court and on the streets.
The Bombay High Court on Thursday, (9th Jan) dismissed a public interest litigation challenging the Maharashtra government’s withdrawal of 12 MLC nominations previously recommended by the Uddhav Thackeray-led government. The court deemed the PIL “misconceived.” The Governor’s prolonged inaction on the nominations had led to the challenge, which ultimately ended with the dismissal.
