Mumbai: Even after granting an “urgent hearing” by taking up the pleas filed jointly by Shiv Sena, NCP and Congress, on Sunday, the Supreme Court on Monday adjourned the matter till Tuesday for passing orders.
This ‘reserving of the order’ and adjourning the matter for one more day is being questioned by some, however, as per legal luminaries, it is a legal process.
Free Press Journal approached some legal experts on this issue to ascertain why the full bench, led by Justice NV Ramanna, would have adjourned the matter.
Justice (retd) Abhay Thipsay of the Bombay High Court, said, “Ideally when matters are taken up on an urgent basis then the practice is to dispose of or pass orders at the earliest.
But given the fact that every matter is different and thus the reason, why the court has taken one more day cannot be speculated.” “In a way, it would help some party, who wants to delay the process but again that would be just a presumption.
Maybe the court wants some more time to deliberate on various issues involved in the matter. It might require extra time to cite case laws and scrutinise the material on record and other legal processes,” Justice Thipsay added.
Noted SC advocate Aman Hingorani trashed all the presumptions and said the bench would need some time to give its findings. “Had the issue been only for ordering a floor test, then I believe, the court would have passed that order on day one itself,” Hingorani said.
“But here the issues are broader. The three parties have not only asked for a floor test but also challenged the decision of the Governor, so now the bench will have to give a finding for the same.
It will have to decide the validity of the Governor's orders and thus would require some time,” Hingorani added.
