The Bombay High Court on Monday heard a fresh PIL filed by Shiv Sena (UBT) leader Sunil Modi challenging the October 14 notification issued by Maharashtra Governor CP Radhakrishnan to approve the names of seven Members of the Legislative Council (MLCs) for 12 vacant posts under the Governor. share.
12 vacancies, to be filled according to Article 171 (5) of the Constitution with people with special knowledge and experience in various fields, remain vacant for more than three years.
A bench of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Amit Borkar heard a fresh PIL filed by Modi on November 26, challenging the notification issued by the Governor hours before the announcement of the Maharashtra Assembly elections, acting on the recommendation of the state. Cabinet under the then chief minister Eknath Shinde.
Sunil Modi, through advocate Sangramsinh R Bhosale, said the Governor would not have approved the seven names as the Supreme Court on October 7 reserved its order on his earlier PIL challenging the then Governor BS Koshyari’s September 2022 decision to withdraw the nomination of the names 12 in MLC. recommended by the MVA government.
Bhosle said that the action of the Governor is illegal and was to influence the decision of the previous PIL and the items placed before the Governor by the Cabinet, based on which the decision was taken, may be reviewed.
Among the seven MLCs, there are three BJP leaders – Chitra Wagh, Vikrant Patil and Dharmaguru Babusingh Maharaj Rathod – and two each from the Shinde-led Shiv Sena and the NCP. Manisha Kayande and Hemant Patil are from Shinde Sena, while Panjak Bhujbal and Idris Naikwadi are from NCP.
Sunil Modi, who sought to quash and set aside the impugned notification, also pointed out that since the Governor has the authority under Article 171 (5) of the Constitution, he should not have acted as a ‘rubber stamp,’ especially if the HC had reserved its judgment on the previous PIL.
The bench asked Modi to include the seven nominated MLC party respondents in the fresh PIL. “If the request is approved, who will be affected? They have been added as parties,” said the bench, and also directed him to file an interim application seeking amendment to the PIL.
The bench heard the matter again on January 15.
On 15 October, Advocate General Birendra Saraf, representing the Government of Maharashtra, informed the Supreme Court that it did not block the appointment of seven MLCs. Saraj said there was no stay or order from the court, and the government had not given an assurance to the HC that the recruitment would not be done.
Why should you buy our Subscription?
You want to be the smartest in the room.
You want access to award-winning journalism.
You don’t want to be misled and misinformed.
Choose your subscription package