Shinde govt may have survived but has lost moral right to continue: Jayant Patil

The Eknath Shinde government in Maharashtra may have survived after the Supreme Court verdict but has lost the moral right to continue, Nationalist Congress Party leader (NCP) Jayant Patil said on Thursday.

He was talking to reporters in Sangli hours after the top court gave its judgment on the political crisis that led to the fall of the three-party Maha Vikas Aghadi (MVA) government following the Eknath Shinde faction's rebellion last year. Uddhav Thackeray's group, NCP and Congress are partners of MVA. "Though the Shinde government survived, it has lost the moral right to remain in power because the court has explained how all the decisions taken by (the then) governor were wrong," said the NCP state chief.

Patil said that now the onus is on the Assembly Speaker to work within the framework of the points mentioned by the top court. "The speaker has to decide at the earliest as the Supreme Court has put the ball in his court and he cannot procrastinate further," he said.

With this verdict, the top court has explained to the people that the episode that had taken place in Maharashtra was unconstitutional and illegal, he said. Earlier in the day, the apex court held that it cannot restore the then MVA government led by Uddhav Thackeray as he resigned without facing the floor test in June last year.

In a unanimous verdict on a batch of pleas related to the political crisis that led to the fall of the three-party MVA government led by Thackeray following a revolt by the Shinde faction, a five-judge constitution bench headed by Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud held that the then Speaker's decision to appoint Bharat Gogawale of the Shinde faction as the whip of Shiv Sena was "illegal".

The court said the then governor Koshyari did not have reasons based on objective material before him to reach the conclusion that then chief minister Thackeray had lost the confidence of the House. The bench said, ''The governor was not justified in calling upon Mr Thackeray to prove his majority on the floor of the House because he did not have reasons based on objective material before him to reach the conclusion that Mr Thackeray had lost the confidence of the House. However, the status quo ante cannot be restored because Mr Thackeray did not face the floor test and tendered his resignation.'' Once a government is democratically elected in accordance with the law, there is a presumption that it enjoys the confidence of the House, the bench said. There must exist some objective material to dislodge this presumption, it added.