Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Ratan Soli Luth vs The State Of Maharashtra on 26 September, 2022
Bench: K.M. Joseph, Hrishikesh Roy
1
ITEM NO.9 COURT NO.5 SECTION IX
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No.18265/2021
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 13-08-2021
in PIL(L) No. 10300/2021 passed by the High Court Of Judicature At
Bombay)
RATAN SOLI LUTH Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR. Respondent(s)
(FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.144421/2021-EXEMPTION FROM FILING
C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT)
Date : 26-09-2022 This petition was called on for hearing today.
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.M. JOSEPH
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HRISHIKESH ROY
For Petitioner(s) Mr. C. U. Singh, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Satyendra Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Atif Inam, Adv.
Mr. Mukul Taly, Adv.
Mr. Mukul Katyal, Adv.
Mr. Vikrant Pachnanda, AOR
For Respondent(s) Mr. Tushar Mehta, SGI
Mr. Siddharth Dharmadihikari, Adv.
Mr. Chirag Shah, Adv.
Mr. Aditya A. Pande, AOR
Mr. Bharat Bagla, Adv.
Mr. Balbir Singh, ASG
Mr. Samarvir Singh, Adv.
Mr. Naman Tandon, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
Signature Not Verified This is a special leave petition which is filed challenging Digitally signed by DEEPAK SINGH Date: 2022.09.27 the impugned order dated 13.08.2021. This special leave petition 17:22:23 IST Reason:
was filed on 25.10.2021. However, this matter is coming up for the 2 first time before the Court, today, i.e. 26th of September, 2022.
It is brought to our notice that there has been a development after the date of the impugned order on 05.09.2022. The subject matter of the controversy revolves around the purport of Article 171 of the Constitution of India. According to the Mr. C. U. Singh, learned senior counsel for the petitioner, the nomination to the Legislative Council having been made by the Council of Ministers on 07.11.2020, it is binding on the Governor and the Governor was expected to act with reasonable dispatch. The Public Interest Litigation according to him before the High Court of Judicature at Bombay came to be filed on 19.04.2021 and thereafter again a period of nearly eight months passed from the date of the nomination (07.11.2020) and the date of the impugned order (13.08.2021). It is thereafter that he would submit on 05.09.2022 the Governor has deemed it appropriate to return the nomination to the Government.
He apprehends that on the basis of the same fresh nomination may be made which may be acted upon to fill up those 12 vacancies which was the subject matter of the nomination dated 07.11.2020.
Having heard Mr. C. U. Singh, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner, we are of the view that the matter needs consideration.
Issue notice.
Mr. Siddharth Dharmadhikari, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent No.1-State of Maharashtra.
Mr. Samarvir Singh, learned counsel accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.2-Union of India.
List the matter on 14th of October, 2022. 3 We direct that no steps shall be taken in respect of vacancies which were sought to be filled up on the basis of the nomination dated 07.11.2020 and which is the subject matter of the litigation till the next date of hearing.
(JAGDISH KUMAR) (RENU KAPOOR) COURT MASTER (SH) ASSISTANT REGISTRAR