Didn't act on rebel Shiv Sena MLAs' notice as its veracity not ascertained: Maharashtra Deputy Speaker Narhari Zirwal to Supreme Court

Maharashtra Assembly Deputy Speaker Narhari Zirwal has told the Supreme Court that he did not take action on a notice allegedly sent by rebel Shiv Sena MLAs headed by Eknath Shinde seeking his removal as deputy speaker as the veracity of the communication could not be ascertainedHe also told the apex court that the notice seeking his removal was not a valid under Article 179C of the Constitution as such a notice can only be given when the Assembly is in sessionThe submission was made in response to a plea filed by Shinde and others challenging the disqualification notices issued by the Deputy Speaker under the Tenth Schedule of the Constitution on grounds including defectionThe Deputy Speaker said the notice seeking his removal which was allegedly signed by 39 MLAs was handed over to the office by an unknown person and an email was sent from the address of advocate Vishal Acharya who is not a member of the Legislative AssemblyAs the master of House it was my duty to verify and ascertain the authenticity as well as genuineness of the purported notice seeking my removal This is particularly more relevant when only the previous day some MLAs from Shiv Sena had met me personally for recognition of Ajay Chaudhari as the legislature party leader the affidavit filed by the Deputy Speaker saidZirwal told the top court that unless he was satisfied that this was not a mischief by someone I was dutybound and entitled to take a view There was no question of taking the same on recordThe Deputy Speaker also stated the Nabam Rabia judgement was not applicable to the present case as there was no valid notice for removal as contemplated under Article 179C of the ConstitutionOn the issue of granting only 48 hours to rebel MLAs to respond to disqualification notice the Deputy Speaker said there was no illegality in it and the timeline for filing of reply is purely discretionaryThere is absolutely no illegality in 48 hours being given to the Petitioners to respond to the disqualification petitions First of all 48 hours notice was given in the first instance The Petitioner never approached me and sought time That apart this Honble Court in Shrimant Balasaheb apart from holding that the timeline for filing of reply is purely discretionary has categorically also held that the number of days is immaterial and what matters is whether the respondent has been given sufficient and reasonable time to file their replies the affidavit saidThe top court on June 27 had kept in abeyance the disqualification proceedings before the Deputy Speaker of the state Assembly till July 11 and also sought responses from the state government and others on their pleas questioning the legality of notices seeking their disqualificationDirecting the then Uddhav Thackerayled Maha Vikas Aghadi MVA government to protect the life liberty and property of the 39 rebel Shiv Sena MLAs headed by Shinde and their family members the top court said the rebels may file replies to the disqualification notices till 530 pm on July 12Besides Shinde the other 15 MLAs are Bharat Gogawale Prakash R Surve Tanhaji Jaywant Savant Mahesh S Shinde Abdul Sattar Sandeepan A Bhumre Sanjay P Sirhsat Yamini Y Jadhav Anil K Babar Latabai C Sonawane Ramesh N Bornare Sanjay B Raimulkar Chimanrao R Patil Balaji D Kalyankar and Balaji P KinilkarThis story has been sourced from a third party syndicated feed agencies Midday accepts no responsibility or liability for its dependability trustworthiness reliability and data of the text Midday managementmiddaycom reserves the sole right to alter delete or remove without notice the content in its absolute discretion for any reason whatsoever