Express News Service
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Friday expressed its dissatisfaction over the delay by Assembly Speaker Rahul Narwekar in deciding the disqualification proceedings against rebel MLAs of the erstwhile Shiv Sena party — Chief Minister Eknath Shinde and 15 others — saying that the proceedings should come to an end before the next elections.
The top court was considering a plea filed by the Shiv Sena (Uddhav Thackeray) faction seeking directions to the Speaker to quickly decide on the disqualification pleas pending against the MLAs. A bench headed by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud came heavily down on the “act” by the Speaker on the anti-defection proceedings, remarking, “Somebody has to advise the Speaker that he cannot defeat orders of the Supreme Court.”
The bench, also comprising Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, said the Speaker has not complied with the top court’s order last month to prepare a time schedule to complete the disqualification proceedings against the rebel MLAs. Narwekar was given one week to spell out a timeline to be submitted before it.
“What kind of time schedule is he prescribing? The idea of the schedule cannot be to delay the hearing. Else their apprehension is correct,” CJI said. The bench also asked Solicitor General Tushar Mehta and Maharashtra Advocate General Dr Birendra Saraf to advise the Speaker in this regard. The court warned that it will set a timeline, if no proper timeline is prescribed for concluding the proceedings by Monday.
Earlier, on September 18, the top court had rapped the speaker. “While this court is cognizant to the need for comity with the Speaker, we also expect the dignity of this court’s judgment to be maintained,” the CJI-bench had said, asking the Speaker to apprise the court of the timeline.
“He (Speaker) has to decide the matter. He can’t do this. What does the speaker do after the May 11 judgment by our court? It appears that nothing has happened. Speaker can’t say now that I will have to hear it in due course. He’s a tribunal under the 10th schedule. Tribunals are amenable to the jurisdiction of the court. What is the speaker proposing to do? He has to sit down and decide the questions now. We didn’t set down a three-month retirement. Now, we have way past four months and we are in the stage of issuing notices,” earlier the top court had remarked.
Also in top court
Einstein’s equation, Darwin’s theory wrong, mustn’t be taught in school, says PIL; junkedThe Supreme Court on Friday junked a plea challenging Charles Darwin’s Theory of Evolution and Einstein’s mass-energy equivalence (E=MC²) equation. The public interest litigation stated that these theories were “incorrect and had caused harm to thousands of people”, and thus should not be taught in educational institutions. “Then you improve your theory… what is the Supreme Court supposed to do? You say you studied something in school, you were a science student. Now you say that those theories are wrong. If you believe they were wrong, the SC has nothing to do. What is the violation of your fundamental right under Article 32?,” the bench said, adding, “We cannot compel anyone to unlearn.” Follow channel on WhatsApp
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Friday expressed its dissatisfaction over the delay by Assembly Speaker Rahul Narwekar in deciding the disqualification proceedings against rebel MLAs of the erstwhile Shiv Sena party — Chief Minister Eknath Shinde and 15 others — saying that the proceedings should come to an end before the next elections.
The top court was considering a plea filed by the Shiv Sena (Uddhav Thackeray) faction seeking directions to the Speaker to quickly decide on the disqualification pleas pending against the MLAs. A bench headed by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud came heavily down on the “act” by the Speaker on the anti-defection proceedings, remarking, “Somebody has to advise the Speaker that he cannot defeat orders of the Supreme Court.”
The bench, also comprising Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, said the Speaker has not complied with the top court’s order last month to prepare a time schedule to complete the disqualification proceedings against the rebel MLAs. Narwekar was given one week to spell out a timeline to be submitted before it.googletag.cmd.push(function() {googletag.display(‘div-gpt-ad-8052921-2’); });
“What kind of time schedule is he prescribing? The idea of the schedule cannot be to delay the hearing. Else their apprehension is correct,” CJI said. The bench also asked Solicitor General Tushar Mehta and Maharashtra Advocate General Dr Birendra Saraf to advise the Speaker in this regard. The court warned that it will set a timeline, if no proper timeline is prescribed for concluding the proceedings by Monday.
Earlier, on September 18, the top court had rapped the speaker. “While this court is cognizant to the need for comity with the Speaker, we also expect the dignity of this court’s judgment to be maintained,” the CJI-bench had said, asking the Speaker to apprise the court of the timeline.
“He (Speaker) has to decide the matter. He can’t do this. What does the speaker do after the May 11 judgment by our court? It appears that nothing has happened. Speaker can’t say now that I will have to hear it in due course. He’s a tribunal under the 10th schedule. Tribunals are amenable to the jurisdiction of the court. What is the speaker proposing to do? He has to sit down and decide the questions now. We didn’t set down a three-month retirement. Now, we have way past four months and we are in the stage of issuing notices,” earlier the top court had remarked.
Also in top court
Einstein’s equation, Darwin’s theory wrong, mustn’t be taught in school, says PIL; junked
The Supreme Court on Friday junked a plea challenging Charles Darwin’s Theory of Evolution and Einstein’s mass-energy equivalence (E=MC²) equation. The public interest litigation stated that these theories were “incorrect and had caused harm to thousands of people”, and thus should not be taught in educational institutions. “Then you improve your theory… what is the Supreme Court supposed to do? You say you studied something in school, you were a science student. Now you say that those theories are wrong. If you believe they were wrong, the SC has nothing to do. What is the violation of your fundamental right under Article 32?,” the bench said, adding, “We cannot compel anyone to unlearn.” Follow channel on WhatsApp
