15-20 rebel Shiv Sena MLAs in touch, urging us to bring them back to Mumbai: Aaditya Thackeray
Karjat (Maharashtra), Jun 27: Maharashtra Tourism Minister Aaditya Thackeray on Monday claimed 15 to 20 Shiv Sena MLAs who have joined the rebel camp are in touch with him and have urged the party to bring them back to Mumbai from Guwahati, where they are lodged in a hotel along with Cabinet minister Eknath Shinde whose rebellion has pushed the MVA government into a major crisis.
Addressing Shiv Sena workers in Karjat, on outskirts of Mumbai, Thackeray, who has been doing firefighting to save the Maha Vikas Aghadi (MVA) government, said every party worker is seeing the current situation as an opportunity and not as a problem.
The dirt has gone away. Now we can do something good, Thackeray said, referring to the rebel MLAs.
The Shiv Sena leader, the son of Chief Minister Uddhav Thackeray, said before the June 21 revolt there were murmurs that some developments will take place in the party, which heads the MVA that also comprises of the NCP and the Congress.
A majority of the Sena MLAs, including nine ministers, have rebelled against the party, threatening the existence of the two-and-a-half-year old government.
The Sena has claimed some legislators have been kidnapped or forcibly taken by the rebel camp.
Around 15-20 MLAs are in touch with us. They call me and Shiv Sainiks and urged us to bring them back from Guwahati, he said.
Their situation is like a prisoner, first in Surat (where the rebels landed after leaving Mumbai last week) and then in Guwahati, he said.
Shinde has claimed the support of more than three dozen Sena MLAs out of the total 55.
Slamming the Sena strongman from Thane without taking his name, Thackeray said some leaders were blindly trusted and the sad part is such people were promoted in the organization continuously.
He said the MLAs leaving the parties was like "cleaning the 'nullahs' and garbage before the onset of monsoon".
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Constitution bench verdict binding on benches of lesser strength, says SC
New Delhi (PTI): A judgement of a Constitution bench would be "binding" on benches of lesser strength, the Supreme Court has said while recalling an April 2022 verdict delivered by it.
In its order dated April 7, 2022, the apex court had held that a panchayat cannot claim ownership of the land which has been taken from the real owners from their permissible ceiling limits under the land law in Haryana.
The apex court had consequently said panchayats can only manage and control the land which has been taken from the owners and cannot claim title.
"It is pertinent to note here that for the land taken from the proprietors by applying pro-rata cut from the permissible ceiling limits of the proprietors, management and control alone vests with the panchayat but such vesting of management and control is irreversible and the land would not revert to the proprietors for redistribution as the common purposes for which land has been carved out not only include the present requirements but the future requirements as well," it had said.
The top court had delivered the verdict on a batch of appeals against a full bench verdict of the Punjab and Haryana High Court which had examined the legality of sub-section 6 of Section 2(g) of the Haryana Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961.
In a judgement delivered on Thursday, a bench of Justices B R Gavai and Sandeep Mehta said that when the high court verdict rested on the law laid down by the apex court's Constitution bench in 1966, "the least that was expected" of the court in the judgement under review was to explain as to why the high court was wrong in relying on the 1966 verdict.
"No law is required to state that a judgement of the Constitution bench would be binding on the benches of a lesser strength. Bhagat Ram (1966 verdict) has been decided by a strength of five judges, this court having a bench strength of two judges could not have ignored the law laid down by the Constitution bench in paragraph 5 in Bhagat Ram," the bench said.
The top court delivered its verdict on a plea seeking review of the April 2022 judgement.
It said that "ignoring" the law laid down by the Constitution bench and taking a view totally contrary to the same would amount to a material error, manifest on the face of the order.
"Ignoring the judgement of the Constitution bench, in our view, would undermine its soundness. The review could have been allowed on this short ground alone," it said.
While allowing the review petition, the bench said, "The judgement and order of this court dated April 7, 2022... is recalled and the appeal is restored to file."
The bench directed that the appeal be listed for hearing on August 7.
The top court observed it was settled that the review would be permissible only if there was a mistake or error apparent on the face of the record or any other sufficient reason was made out.
"The review of the judgement would be permissible only if a material error, manifest on the face of the order, undermines its soundness or results in miscarriage of justice. We are also aware that such an error should be an error apparent on the face of the record and should not be an error which has to be fished out and searched," it noted.
