Setback for Uddhav camp as SC allows Election Comm. to decide on ‘real Shiv Sena’

(** Advocate Neeraj Kishan Kaul argued for Eknath Shinde camp and said - About 1.5 lakh party members have sent their representations to the EC supporting the Shinde group.) 

Senior Advocate Maninder Singh, appearing for the Shinde group, said there was a pre-poll alliance. Uddhav Thackeray resigned as Chief Minister a day before the floor test. So, it has to be presumed that he lost majority. These facts show that there is no prima facie case for the petitioner, that is the Thackeray camp.

Setback for Uddhav camp as SC allows Election Comm. to decide on ‘real Shiv Sena’

New Delhi 

In a big setback for Uddhav Thackeray, the Supreme Court on Tuesday, Sept 27,  allowed the Election Commission to proceed with the Eknath Shinde group’s plea on recognising them as 'real Shiv Sena' and to use the Sena's official symbol.

A five-judge Bench comprising Justices D Y Chandrachud, M R Shah, Krishna Murari, Hima Kohli, and P S Narasimha passed the order after a plea from the Uddhav Thackeray camp which was argued by Kapil Sibal.

"The Interlocutory Application is dismissed,” the court said adding, “We direct that there would be no 

stay of the proceedings before the Election Commission of India". 

Sibal argued before the bench that Chief Minister Eknath Shinde cannot approach the EC once he has incurred 

disqualification. "I challenged the very locus of the person who has moved the EC".

Sibal maintained that Shinde has incurred disqualification as his various acts amounted to voluntary giving up of 

the party membership under Paragraph  2(1)(a) of the Tenth Schedule; also he has violated the party whip 

as per paragraph 2(1)(b) of the tenth schedule.

The bench observed that the issue is in relation to the ambit of jurisdiction of the Speaker under the tenth schedule.

"The political party is a much wider configuration than the legislative unit of that party which consists of the elected members  does the dispute in relation to the former in the legislative unit affect the authority of Election Commission. That is the heart of the matter", Justice Chandrachud observed.

The apex court also wanted to know would disqualification under the tenth schedule have effect on the symbol order.

Justice Chandrachud also observed : 

"What is troubling is, the whole concept of disqualification is in relation to the house. The jurisdiction of the Election Commission is to decide who represents the political party. What happens in the floor of the House is a microcosm of the consequence of elections.That is an area where thought has to be put". 

"The genesis of the entire dispute is what happened on the floor of the House. Symbols order predates the tenth schedule. Does the fact that the determination whether or not disqualification is exclusively entrusted to the Speaker, does that denude the ECI of its powers and does that disqualification impact the ECI powers?", Justice Chandrachud asked.

ends