Mumbai: Apparently peeved by a recent Supreme Court ruling restricting the use of pictures of politicians in government advertisements, the Shiv Sena trained guns on the judiciary, terming the latest move as 'unjust' here on Friday.

Referring to the ruling which allows only the pictures of president, prime minister or the chief justice in government advertisements, the Sena asked whether this could amount to insulting the democratically elected state governments, the Parliament and the legislatures.

In a sharp edit in the party mouthpiece Saamana, the Sena pointed out that whenever the courts give any verdict, we say, "Yes, Maharaj! We accept it!" and nod our heads in agreement, taking care to ensure nobody commits a contempt of court.

"But in recent times, do the courts deliver judgements or just bypass the elected governments and are themselves directing the administration? Now, since it is the SC which has given this ruling, all of us have no option but to bow and nod 'Yes, Maharaj!' in agreement," the Sena said.

Recently, the edit pointed out, the Maharashtra assembly initiated contempt proceedings against a woman (Shobhaa De, but the edit has not named her) for insulting Marathis, but even there the court stayed the assembly's actions.

"Then why do we rave about democracy and take pains in sun or rains to constitute assemblies... One one hand we sing paeans to democracy and on the other, the courts deliver orders which break the very back of democracy," the Sena said.

The judiciary insists the government should not interfere in the selection or appointment of judges, over which a huge controversy is currently raging.

"The judiciary is independent. Then why can't the judiciary accept that Parliament and legislatures are also supreme? Frequent interventions in government functioning don't serve to enhance the image of the judiciary," the Sena urged.

Pointing out that there are black sheep everywhere, including politics and judiciary and although the judiciary should never be insulted, the manner in which most retired judges have commented on it (the judiciary) is also a matter of concern.

"Who should marry whom, how should husbands and wives behave, what should be colour of the bedroom curtains, what we should eat or not, what should be done of Ram Temple... should the courts decide all these?" the Sena demanded.

"If so, then why is the Maharashtra-Karnataka boundary issue pending since 60 years, the manner in which the court gave a speedy decision in Salman Khan case, why was the same (speed) not visible in the case of Sadhvi Pragnya Singh Thakur, Col. Prasad Purohit or Asaram Bapu?" it added.

Pointing to another issue, the Sena asked the judiciary to concentrate on the lakhs of pending litigation in various courts around the country and deliver its sharp stand on various issues like a uniform civil code or Article 370 which can make Jammu and Kashmir an integral part of India.

"Its perfectly fine to curb those who are defacing urban centres with huge hoardings, but imposing a ban (of photos in government ads) of this type is 'unjust' to the democratically elected peoples' representatives... it would only reduce the peoples' faith in the judiciary," the Sena said.