1 hr ago
Supreme Court Questions Legislative Majority Test in Shiv Sena Dispute
The Supreme Court is examining which group should control the Shiv Sena name and election symbol.
The dispute is between the Eknath Shinde faction and the Uddhav Thackeray faction.
The Shinde group says it should be recognized because it has more elected lawmakers.
The judges asked whether that is safe when some of those lawmakers might still face disqualification.
The Shinde group said the Election Commission had no better workable test in the circumstances.
Justice Joymalya Bagchi suggested that neither group might have received the reserved symbol.
Instead, both groups could have used different symbols and competed independently.
The court did not finish the hearing and will continue it on Thursday.
The Supreme Court questioned whether legislative majority is a safe test for deciding political-party ownership.
The bench noted that disqualification proceedings were pending against some legislators forming the Shinde faction’s majority.
The Shinde faction argued that the Election Commission adopted legislative majority because other tests were impractical in the case.
Justice Joymalya Bagchi suggested both factions could have been denied the reserved symbol and required to contest with separate symbols.
The hearing concerns the Election Commission’s recognition of the Shinde faction and the Maharashtra Speaker’s decision not to disqualify its MLAs.
- Who
- The Supreme Court, the Eknath Shinde faction, and the Uddhav Thackeray faction are central to the dispute.
- What
- The court is reviewing whether legislative majority was an appropriate basis for recognizing the Shinde faction as the original Shiv Sena.
- Where
- The proceedings are before the Supreme Court in New Delhi.
- When
- The hearing took place on Wednesday and is scheduled to continue on Thursday.
- Why
- The Thackeray-led faction is challenging the Election Commission’s recognition of the Shinde faction and its use of the Shiv Sena name and election symbol.
Thackeray Faction
Shinde Faction
Use of the Shiv Sena name and symbol
Thackeray Faction
The Thackeray faction says the Shinde group’s use of the Shiv Sena name and election symbol is illegitimate and wants the symbol restored or its use restrained.
Shinde Faction
The Shinde faction defends the Election Commission’s recognition, arguing that legislative majority was the only workable test in the circumstances.
Meaning of legislative majority
Thackeray Faction
The legal challenge questions whether legislators’ numerical strength should decide party ownership when disqualification proceedings involving them are pending.
Shinde Faction
The Shinde faction says legislative majority can represent democratic will and remains a valid test in appropriate cases.
Alternative to awarding the reserved symbol
Thackeray Faction
The court raised the possibility that neither faction should receive the reserved symbol and that both should compete independently.
Shinde Faction
The Shinde faction argues that the Election Commission was entitled to devise a workable test rather than deny the symbol to both groups.
Key facts
- Court bench
- Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi, and Justice V. Mohana
- Central legal question
- Whether legislative majority can always be a safe or determinative test for political-party ownership
- Election Commission decision
- It recognized the Shinde faction as the original Shiv Sena and applied legislative majority as the workable test
- Shinde faction’s argument
- The party’s organizational structure and divided elected representatives made other tests difficult to apply
- Alternative proposed
- Both factions could have been denied the reserved symbol and required to contest using separate symbols
- Next hearing
- The proceedings will continue on Thursday
Quotes
Supreme Court bench comprising Surya Kant, Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana
Three-judge Supreme Court bench hearing the Shiv Sena dispute
“Neither group needed to be given the advantage of the reserved symbol. Both groups could have been directed to select different symbols and contest on their own strength, not on Balasaheb’s strength,”
deccanchronicle.com
“Although legislative majority is a relevant test, can it always be the determinative or safe test when disqualification proceedings concerning those very legislators are pending?”
deccanchronicle.com
Sources
Related news
Shiv Sena Split Case: Shinde Faction Defends Election Commission Test
Uddhav faction tells Supreme Court disqualification pleas must come first
Thackeray Faction Tells Supreme Court Shinde Camp Reaps Defection Benefits
Shinde Sena Challenges Shiv Sena’s 2018 Power Shift
Supreme Court Seeks Replies From 20 Rebel TMC MPs
Ambedkar Says Frozen Shiv Sena Symbol Could Benefit BJP
Supreme Court Rejects Plea for Fraud-Proof Medical Degree Verification
Supreme Court Dismisses 271 Appeals Over Soldiers’ Disability Pensions
Supreme Court Tightens Vehicle Repossession Rules, Penalizes Financier
TMC Factional Fight Intensifies Over Disqualification Plea Against 10 MLAs
