In one of the Supreme Court hearing sessions recently, somewhere within the whole solemnity of it, senior counsel Abhishek Manu Singhvi levity-lively replied to Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, ‘No internship to you’.
Singhvi’s cover was lifted, as he mixed his remarks with a Supreme Court of India’s hearing that was presided over by Justice BR Gavai, he showered praise on Singhvi for his overwhelming courtroom efficiency and magnificent timing as he has to appear for different courts at different timings.
In reaction to Mehta’s expressed hope of being able to work with Singhvi for three months to be instructed, the solicitor remarked in a lighthearted fashion that he was romanticizing the issue.
But West Bengal’s government brought an original suit against the centre on the Supreme Court bench where Justice BR Gavai was conducting the hearing of the case. The petition in question regarded the CBI’s move to initiate investigations into numerous in-state cases without offering the necessary permission from the appropriate departments of the state government.
The principal issue in the matter is Article 131 of the Constitution, which bestows in exclusivity original jurisdiction on the Supreme Court over the Centre/State disputations. West Bengal Government, in its case, plead ultra vires using Article 256, which mentions the powers of the Central Government to place investigation under its supervision.
This is the very point in the entire case, which is that in November 2018, West Bengal made an announcement, cancelling the consent granted to the CBI to start their raids until they give the go-ahead. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, who was representing the Centre, gave an emphatic speech highlighting the significance of Article 131 and its misuse. Mehta further exemplified that the alleged incidents that the state cited in its suit involved CBI investigations and were not decisions of the central government.
Check here for the latest updates in Hindi!