Uddhav Thackeray vs Eknath Shinde : Live Updates From Supreme Court In Shiv Sena Case [Feb 28]

Singhvi: The fifth consequence is the swearing in which happens on 30th. The seeds are in place- there has been an advanced notice. And now there is acting upon the letter- the swearing in.

Singhvi: Letter is not a non quashable instrument. It can be quashed.

Singhvi: Therefore, to answer your question - that what should we do?

Simplest way is to quash his letter. Suppose you quash the letter, the status quo ante is automatically restored. Is that constitutional morality? Clearly it is.

Singhvi: 4. He is saying that come to me and I will swear you in. This is an advanced notice.

Singhvi: 2. That you, Mr Uddhav is not Shiv Sena but those people are. 3. He's doing this when there's a pending disqualification proceeding and a hotly contented Supreme Court matter.

Singhvi: How can the governor say this? [Reads letter by governor to Thackeray]

Look at the consequence of this letter- 1. It is a certification by an executive nominee that the allegedly disqualified members aren't disqualified - that's his confidence.

Singhvi: The governor is in error and the executive is coming in and recognising it.

Singhvi: Fourth point is that the governor recognises the split. The supreme court can't do it but the governor can do it? 

Singhvi: So this is executive's lateral direct entry to a no-go area. Supreme Court for the polity, for constitutional morality, must decide.

Singhvi: Your lordships is dealing with a legislative issue. Executive has no role to come into it. The governor, though a constitutional post holder, is an executive appointee.