The Supreme Court has consented to hear Team Thackeray’s appeal, which challenges the Election Commission’s decision to give the Shinde group the Shiv Sena name and “bow and arrow” emblem.
The Supreme Court of India consented to hear a case brought by the Uddhav Thackeray group challenging the EC’s decision on Wednesday to recognize the Eknath Shinde party as the legitimate Shiv Sena.
A panel made up of Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, Justices Krishna Murari and P S Narasimha, as well as veteran barrister Kapil Sibal, who was defending the Thackeray group, heard the matter on Tuesday.
“If the EC ruling is not stayed then they will take over the emblem and the financial accounts,” the Thackeray camp argued in their appeal.
Team Shinde has argued that the High Court has already heard and dismissed the poll symbol issue and has urged the Election Commission to proceed with making a determination.
They questioned why the Uddhav Thackeray faction should approach the Supreme Court directly in the light of the situation and why the court should become involved.
Kindly list it before the Constitution bench tomorrow. Sibal asked the court, and the Supreme court responded that it needed to review the case files before scheduling a hearing for Wednesday at 3:30 pm.
The Eknath Shinde-led faction received the “bow and arrow” poll symbol on Friday after the Election Commission recognized it as the real Shiv Sena Commission let the Uddhav Thackeray faction preserve the “flaming torch” poll emblem given to them till the conclusion of the assembly by-elections in the state in a 78-page ruling on the lengthy fight for leadership of the organization.
According to the Commission, the 55 Shiv Sena candidates who won the 2019 Maharashtra Assembly elections garnered nearly 76% of the votes polled in favour of MLAs who backed Shinde. The MLAs from the Uddhav Thackeray group garnered 23.5% of the votes cast in favour of the Shiv Sena candidates who won, according to the three-member commission.
The Thackeray camp complained that the polling panel “failed” to take into account that his position has support from the majority of members of the Legislative Council and Rajya Sabha. The Uddhav Thackeray side argued that the electoral commission’s judgement was invalid and that Shinde’s purported legislative majority served as the basis for the whole “impugned order” (EC’s decision), which should be resolved by the Constitution Bench of the highest court.
What does the appeal claims?
The appeal claims that the Election Commission of India (ECI) “has neglected to take into consideration the petitioner’s majority in both the Legislative Council (12 out of 12) and the Rajya Sabha (3 out of 3).” The legislative majority alone is not a reliable indicator of who holds the majority for purposes of deciding a dispute, it is contended, in a situation like this where Even the majority of the parliamentary body is divided (i.e., the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha, as well as the Legislative Assembly and Legislative Council). This is especially true in light of the potential loss of membership rights for the suspected members.