PTI,Mumbai
Published by: Sanjeev Kumar Jha
Updated Wed, 09 Mar 2022 03:12 PM IST
Summary
In Maharashtra, the difference between the Chief Minister and the Governor has reached the Bombay High Court. The High Court has made a strong observation in this matter.
Today the Bombay High Court has made a strong remark about the difference between the Chief Minister and the Governor in Maharashtra. The High Court said that it is unfortunate that the two supreme constitutional leaders of the state did not trust each other. It would be appropriate to solve The court made the oral observations while presiding over two PILs filed through advocates Mahesh Jethmalani and Subhash Jha challenging the process of selection of the Speaker of the Maharashtra Assembly. The High Court dismissed the arguments after a lengthy hearing, holding that the procedure does not violate the fundamental right of citizens to equality before the law, as guaranteed by Article 14 of the Constitution.
Jethmalani, who represented BJP MLA Girish Mahajan in one of the two PILs, told the high court that the current procedure, which was brought in through an amendment in December 2021, has In which it was said that the Governor alone cannot advise the Chief Minister to choose the Speaker of the Assembly, but the Council of Ministers should also be involved. Jethmalani further argued that by not interfering in the issue, the court would fail to protect the public interest.
High Court reprimanded
The High Court, however, said that the petitioners would have to work hard to show how the general public was being affected by the election of the Speaker. The public is least interested in who will be the Speaker of the Assembly. Just go and ask the public who is the Speaker of the Lok Sabha? How many people will be able to answer in this court? You have to show whether this issue is worthy of PIL or not? The Speaker is only a member of the legislature. What is the public interest here?
Expansion
Today the Bombay High Court has made a strong remark about the difference between the Chief Minister and the Governor in Maharashtra. The High Court said that it is unfortunate that the two supreme constitutional leaders of the state did not trust each other. It would be appropriate to solve The court made the oral observations while presiding over two PILs filed through advocates Mahesh Jethmalani and Subhash Jha challenging the process of selection of the Speaker of the Maharashtra Assembly. The High Court dismissed the arguments after a lengthy hearing, holding that the procedure does not violate the fundamental right of citizens to equality before the law, as guaranteed by Article 14 of the Constitution.
Jethmalani, who represented BJP MLA Girish Mahajan in one of the two PILs, told the high court that the current procedure, which was brought in through an amendment in December 2021, has In which it was said that the Governor alone cannot advise the Chief Minister to choose the Speaker of the Assembly, but the Council of Ministers should also be involved. Jethmalani further argued that by not interfering in the issue, the court would fail to protect the public interest.
High Court reprimanded
The High Court, however, said that the petitioners would have to work hard to show how the general public was being affected by the election of the Speaker. The public is least interested in who will be the Speaker of the Assembly. Just go and ask the public who is the Speaker of the Lok Sabha? How many people will be able to answer in this court? You have to show whether this issue is worthy of PIL or not? The Speaker is only a member of the legislature. What is the public interest here?