Governor didn’t give time: Shiv Sena’s Supreme Court plea
The party was asked to make a mention of the case for out-of turn hearing on Wednesday morning. Not leaving anything to chance, Sena is readying a petition challenging President’s rule imposed in Maharashtra after the governor’s report claimed tha...
Sena plea alleged that BJP had made a concerted attempt to create a situation for President’s rule.
The party said that it may challenge the decision to impose President’s rule too. Challenging Maharashtra governor Bhagat Singh Koshyari’s decision to deny Sena time to get letters of support from Congress and NCP to form a government, Sena petition said: “Any imposition of Presidents rule would also result in horse trading by BJP to somehow cobble up a majority by using unconstitutional means. It is submitted that in these circumstances any precipitate action of the governor to enable BJP to acquire MLAs by poaching would be an anathema to democracy and cannot be countenanced.”
Though Sena sought an immediate hearing, the court registry conveyed its inability to constitute a bench to hear the case on Tuesday.
The party was asked to make a mention of the case for out-of turn hearing on Wednesday morning. Not leaving anything to chance, Sena is readying a petition challenging President’s rule imposed in Maharashtra after the governor’s report claimed that no party was in any position to form a government.
The Sena contested the decision and called it hasty. It had sought more time from Koshiyari to get letters of support from Congress and NCP.
Sena said the governor’s decision was “arbitrary, unconstitutional, unreasonable, capricious and mala fide. The factum of majority cannot be decided by the governor. The floor of the House is the only constitutionally ordained forum to test majority.
Government formation is a sacrosanct political process in a democracy and the governor cannot act as a stumbling block for thwart i n g /stalling a political party from forming the government.
As per constitutional conventions and practices, the governor is duty bound to allow reasonable time for political parties to conclude their negotiations on government formation and not act as an agent/mouthpiece of the central government and/or the ruling party at the Centre and has to allow reasonable time to political outfits to present the conclusion of their negotiations before taking a decision to reject any claim to form the government.
This is a classic case where constitutional conventions that have the force of law have been followed by the governor in sheer breach.
Forming of the government is a reflection of the will of the people, a sacrosanct act involving various political stake holders”.