On Thursday, a constitution bench of the Supreme Court headed by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud pronounced its verdict on the petitions filed by both Uddhav Thackeray faction and Eknath Shinde faction in regards to the rebellion by Shinde last year that resulted to split of Shiv Sena and him ruling the state allying with the BJP.

The bench along Justice Chandrachud included Justices MR Shah, Krishna Murari, Hima Kohli and PS Narasimha.

Here’s all you need to know about today’s verdict–

CJI said cannot quash resignation

CJI Chandrachud ruled the bench cannot quash the resignation of Uddhav Thackeray from the CM post as he did not face floor test, Status quo ante cannot be restored as Thackeray resigned.

CJI ruled that the erstwhile Maha Vikas Aghadi government in Maharashtra cannot be restored due to the resignation.

During the rebellion episode last year, the Shinde camp approached then Maharashtra Governor Bhagat Singh Koshiyari citing life threats after which Koshiyari asked Thackeray to call for a trust vote but just before it could take place, Thackeray resigned.

Read Also: Delhi govt vs Centre: Elected government has power over services, L-G duty-bound to comply, says Supreme Court

Bench on Governor’s role

The bench ruled that the Governor has no role to play in any intra party to inter party disputes and is not entitled to jump into political matters.

The bench also ruled that the Governor is ought not to act on the basis that some members want to leave a party (referring to action taken by Koshiyari when Shinde along other leaders wished to leave Shiv Sena expressing their dissatisfaction).

The bench in its verdict talking about the decision taken by Koshiyari to call for floor test, said he should not have done it relying on the security concerns raised by Shinde group and that he is ought not to take a decision on a letter that states that Thackeray has lost the majority.

The bench ruled that that Governor has no power in its hands to say that ruling government has lost the majority count.

On the speaker’s role of disqualification of MLAs

Chief Justice Chandrachud on the role of speaker in disqualification of MLAs said, the matter has been refereed to a larger bench.

The Shinde Camp last year raised a no-confidence motion against then deputy speaker of the house who issued disqualification notice to the rebel MLAs.

In a petition filed by Shinde faction, it raised questions over the power of a assembly Speaker to consider disqualification proceedings as the 2016 Nabam Rebia judgment of a five-judge bench pronounced a verdict that a Speaker cannot consider such proceedings if any no- confidence motions against him/her are pending before the House.

Stalin govt files defamation suit against Tamil Nadu BJP chief

Nearly a dozen army school shut down in Jammu after intel of terror attack, high alert issued

The Delhi government scored a major victory today in its arduous power-struggle with the BJP-ruled Centre as the Supreme Court ruled in favour of the Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal-led dispensation, stating that the AAP regime has legislative and executive power over services— including the Indian Administrative Service (IAS), except law and order and land—and the Lieutenant Governor (L-G) is duty-bound to comply with the elected government’s decision in this matter.

In a unanimous verdict, a five-judge Constitution bench of the Apex court which comprises of Chief Justice DY Chandrachud along with Justices MR Shah, Krishna Murari, Hima Kohli and P S Narasimha, ruled that the Delhi government must have control over services and the Lieutenant Governor is bound by its decision.

The bench observed that the Union Territory of Delhi has ‘sui generis’ (unique) character and has legislative and executive power over services and stated that if a democratically elected government’s responsibility towards the legislature and the electorate becomes diluted if it was denied control over its officers and the power to hold them to account.

The Supreme Court bench ruled that the L-G exercise powers under the administrative role as entrusted by the President, however, his executive powers can only extend to matters falling outside the scope of the legislative assembly, adding that the it does not mean administration over entire Delhi otherwise the purpose of having an elected government in the national capital stands defeated.

Read Also: Nearly a dozen army school shut down in Jammu after intel of terror attack, high alert issued

The bench further stated that a democratically elected government shall have control over its officers and the power to hold them to account.

It noted that the officers will feel as if they aren’t accountable to anyone if they sense that the elected government has no power over them.

 Observing that even though the Capital Territory of Delhi (NCTD) is not a full-fledged state and remains a federal entity, the top court stressed that it must be ensured that the Centre does not take over the governing power of the states, adding that the Union government’s power over certain subjects of the Concurrent List cannot be such that the functioning of the State is affected.

Earlier, on January 18, the Apex court had reserved its order in the plea filed by the Aam Aadmi Party dispensation following a split verdict by a two-judge bench on February 14, 2019.

8 Telangana students die by suicide post school exam results

Stalin govt files defamation suit against Tamil Nadu BJP chief

The Tamil Nadu government has a filed a defamation suit against president of the state BJP unit K Annamalai over his recent remarks of corruption on state Chief Minister MK Stalin.

The complaint against the BJP leader has been filed under Section 199 (prosecution for defamation) of the CrPc.

The defamation petition was filed by city public prosecutor G Devarajan, which read that the accusation that were made by Annamalai were made without any evidence.

The petition also read that Stalin’s efforts in bringing social justice across the state has received a national fame and that Annamalai is doing this to fulfill his political will.

The complaint is regarding a press meet that was held by Annamalai on April 14 where he released the DMK files.

During the said press conference Annamalai charged Chief Minister Stalin alleging him of taking a bribe of Rs 200 crore in 2011 for a deal of Chennai Metro contract.

Read Also: Traffic camera pics ruined a Kerala man’s marriage . Here’s how

The state BJP chief also had claimed that leaders of Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) are the owner of assets worth Rs 1.34 lakh crore which were earned by corruption.

Annamalai adding to his list of allegations against the ruling party leader in the state claimed that members of Stalin’s family were directors of a firm in Dubai which is undergoing investigation in the state.

In response to these allegations of Annamalai, the state government filed the complaint in which it has mentioned that Annamalai made defamatory remarks and showed videos to malign CM Stalin’s reputation.

The ruling DMK in its legal notice against the state BJP president has demanded an apology from the latter over his statements against their leader and Chief Minister Stalin along with the party and issued a Rs 500 crore notice in lieu of the damages.

In the meanwhile, Annamalai denying of committing any offence has also said he would not apologize.

Karnataka Assembly Election 2023: Congress ahead in exit polls, hung house possibilities beat BJP chances

Samajwadi Party MLA Rakesh Pratap Singh beats up local BJP leader’s husband in UP police station | WATCH