Told courts cannot intervene in House matter, bench says judicial review not barred Shiv Sena rebel MLAs, who had been asked by Maharashtra Deputy Speaker Narhari Zirwal to reply by Monday evening to notices on pleas seeking their disqualification from the Assembly, got interim relief when the Supreme Court said they had time until 5.30 pm on July 12 to send their replies. The vacation bench of Justices Surya Kant and Justice J B Pardiwala which issued notice on two petitions — one by Sena rebel leader Eknath Shinde and another by 15 MLAs of his faction who had been served disqualification notices — fixed July 11 as the next date of hearing. “In the meanwhile, as an interim measure, the time granted by Deputy Speaker to petitioners or other similarly placed MLAs to submit their written submissions today by 5.30 pm be extended till July 12, 2022, 5.30 pm,” the bench directed. Taking note of the rebel MLAs’ submission that their life and property were under threat, the bench recorded the statement of the Maharashtra standing counsel that “adequate steps have already been taken and the state government shall further ensure that no harm is caused to the life, liberty and property of the 39 MLAs or their family members”. It directed that a counter-affidavit be filed by the respondents within five days and that the MLAs could file rejoinder affidavits, if any, within the next three days. It also sought a counter-affidavit after the MLAs and the Assembly Deputy Speaker sought to contradict each other on the notice claimed to have been served by the dissident MLAs, seeking disqualification of the Deputy Speaker. The Deputy Speaker contended that the notice was sent from an unregistered email and was not taken on record as its genuineness was in doubt. The bench wondered what steps had been taken to check its genuineness and directed that the developments in this be explained in an affidavit. Senior Advocates A M Singhvi and Devdutt Kamat, appearing for the Deputy Speaker and other respondents, opposed the prayer for interim orders, saying disqualifications proceedings by Speaker/Deputy Speaker were proceedings of the House and courts cannot intervene. But the bench referred to a Supreme Court ruling which said a judicial review is not barred. Appearing for the rebel MLAs, Senior Advocate Neeraj Kishan Kaul referred to the 2016 Constitution Bench ruling in Nabam Rebia vs Deputy Speaker, Arunachal Pradesh Assembly to argue that Speaker/Deputy Speaker of an Assembly cannot decide on disqualification of MLAs while a motion for his or her removal is pending.