The Supreme Court has allowed a businessperson named Ratan Luth from Nashik to withdraw his special leave petition (SLP) regarding the failure of the Maharashtra Governor to fill 12 vacant Member of Legislative Council (MLC) posts in the state. This decision came after the Bombay High Court’s ruling in August 2021, which stated that while it couldn’t issue directions to the Governor, it believed he had an obligation to either accept or reject the recommendations for MLC posts within a reasonable timeframe.
Back in 2020, then Chief Minister Uddhav Thackeray’s Council of Ministers had recommended 12 individuals for the MLC positions, but the Governor failed to act on these recommendations. Ratan Luth, who operates two schools in Nashik, filed a public interest litigation in 2021 against the delay in the appointment of the nominated MLCs.
The primary issue in the case was the interpretation of Article 171 of the Indian Constitution, which governs the composition of the Legislative Council and specifies that the number of members cannot be less than 40. Luth’s counsel argued that the CoM’s nomination on November 7, 2020, was binding on the Governor, who was expected to act promptly.
During the recent Supreme Court hearing, Luth’s senior counsel expressed his client’s desire to withdraw the SLP. The Solicitor General representing the state didn’t object, leaving the decision up to the Court. However, an intervenor, represented by senior counsel Nikhil Nayyar, opposed the withdrawal and instead requested permission to initiate independent proceedings.
The Chief Justice-led bench permitted Luth to withdraw his SLP while stating that the Court hadn’t expressed any opinion on the raised legal question, leaving it open to be addressed in an appropriate case.
Although the Supreme Court’s decision allows Luth to withdraw his petition, it doesn’t address the underlying matter of the delay in filling the MLC vacancies in Maharashtra. The issue remains unresolved, and citizens continue to be affected by the governor’s failure to act on the recommendations made by the Council of Ministers.
The case has highlighted the need for clarity and efficiency in the nomination and appointment process for MLC positions in Maharashtra. The delay in filling these vacancies has hindered governance and affected the rights of citizens who would benefit from the expertise and representation of the nominated individuals.
It remains to be seen whether the Maharashtra government, under the leadership of Chief Minister Uddhav Thackeray, will take necessary steps to address this issue promptly and ensure timely appointments to the vacant MLC posts. Unless action is taken soon, the matter could persist and further impact the functioning of the Legislative Council.
As the case continues to unfold, it underscores the significance of upholding constitutional principles and ensuring efficient governance that positively impacts the lives of citizens. The Supreme Court’s decision in allowing the withdrawal of the SLP doesn’t offer a resolution to the long-standing issue, but it does keep the legal question open for future consideration. Ultimately, the appointment of the 12 nominated MLCs in Maharashtra remains uncertain, leaving a gap in the state’s legislative representation.
