The Bombay High Court (HC) rejected a petition by Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) MLC Gopichand Padalkar in Sangli, challenging the appointment of the Legislative Council vice-president and Shiv Sena MLC Neelam Gorhe.
Padalkar sought to set aside the appointment of the whites, claiming that the election on September 8, 2020 was illegal and arbitrary, and sought re-election. However, the court stated that there was no unlawful or unconstitutional action in electing the former head, Whites, as the Deputy Chairman, because he enjoyed the support of the majority of the members.
A division bench of Justice Nitin Jamdar and Justice Milind Jadhav, hearing Padalkar’s plea, informed senior counsel Milind Sathe and advocate Prahlad Paranjpe that on 4 September 2020, the Legislative Council issued a general notice announcing that it was in session. Will happen. On 7 and 8 September, and the post of deputy chairman vacated from April 2020 will be filled. The notice also stipulated that only those who tested negative for Kovid-19 would be allowed to attend the session.
Padalkar submitted that since he had tested positive for coronovirus, he could not participate in the election of the Deputy Chairman. He argued that since the provision to issue the September 4 notice was not followed, it made the notice illegal and the election process unconstitutional.
However, Advocate General Ashutosh Kumbakoni, representing the state, opposed the petition and said that the validity of any action of the Council cannot be disputed on the basis of any irregularity in the process. He further argued that the petitioners were unable to participate in the election process due to peculiar circumstances and not by any action of the respondents. Kumbakoni concluded that none of HC’s intervention was warranted, and therefore, the petition should be dismissed.
After hearing the presentations, the bench said, “There is no merit in this challenge. Even considering the challenge on this count, the prejudice flowing from the same must be pre-evident. The petitioner is calling on the court to examine the justification of the procedure adopted by the Legislative Council, which is impenetrable in view of the Constitution of India. The court then dismissed the petition.