A five-judge constitution bench of the Supreme Court on Friday said that the question whether its 2016 Naban Rabia judgment restraining speaker, faced with his own removal, to act  on the disqualification will now await till the hearing on all the petitions arising from Shiv Sena squabble involving former chief minister Uddhav Thackeray and current Chief Minister Eknath Shinde factions.

Nabam Rabia judgement by a five-judge bench came on 2016 political crisis in Arunachal Pradesh which essentially centred around certain directions issued by then state Governor Jyoti Prasad Rajkhowa relating to state assembly proceedings.

A five-judge constitution bench of Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud, Justice M R Shah, Justice Krishna Murari, Justice Hima Kohli and Justice Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha said the issue of reconsideration of Nabam Rebia judgment cannot be decided on “abstract” and has to be ascertained whether it arises from the facts of the case before the court.

The hearing on a batch of petitions will commence from February 21.

Stating that “the issue of whether a reference to a Bench of seven Judges should be made cannot be considered in the abstract; isolated or divorced from the facts of the case”, the order said, “ Whether, the above principle which has been formulated in Nabam Rebia… has an impact upon the factual position in the present case, needs deliberation.”

 “…,  the issue whether a reference of the decision in Nabam Rebia … to a larger Bench is warranted, would be determined together with the merits of the case.”

The court made it clear that the hearing on a batch of petitions arising from the actions of then Maharashtra assembly Speaker, his successor and that of the Governor would not be limited to the question whether 2016 Nabam Rabia judgment requires reconsideration but the entirety of matters on merit.

On Thursday (February 16) the constitution bench had reserved its order on the question whether the 2016 Nabam Rabia judgment requires reconsideration after hearing arguments from both the sides spread over a little over two and half days.

The core of the issue is at what stage a Speaker of a legislature, faced with a notice of removal, is disabled from acting on the petitions seeking disqualification of legislators under the tenth schedule of the constitution. As per today’s order, the question is whether, given the facts of the Shiv Sena centric Maharashtra political crisis and issues emerging from it, does 2016 judgment warrants consideration.

Uddhav Thackeray camp has filed a number of petitions challenging the then Maharashtra Governor Bhagat Singh Koshiyari’s decision to invite Eknath Shinde to form the government, the Speaker’s election, floor test, and newly appointed Speaker recognising the whip of Eknath Shinde group as the whip of Shiv Sena.

Uddhav Thackeray faction has contended that the newly appointed Speaker had no jurisdiction to recognise Shinde faction’s whips as Uddhav Thackeray was still the head of Shiv Sena official party.

Thackeray camp had also sought the suspension of new Chief Minister Shinde and 15 rebel MLAs from the assembly against whom disqualification pleas are pending.

Shinde group on the other hand has challenged the disqualification notices issued by the Deputy Speaker to 16 rebel MLAs as well as appointment of Ajay Choudhary as Shiv Sena Legislature Party leader, which is also pending before the apex court.