Supreme Court on Dhanush-Baan controversy: The Supreme Court of India will today (February 22) hear a petition (petition by the Uddhav Thackeray faction) against the Election Commission’s decision to allot the name ‘Shiv Sena’ and ‘bow and arrow’ symbol to the faction led by Maharashtra Chief Minister Eknath. Shinde.
A bench headed by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud agreed to hear the petition at around 3.30 pm on Wednesday. Senior advocate Kapil Sibal urged the Supreme Court to hear the plea on Wednesday, saying that if the EC’s decision is not upheld and challenged, bank accounts of the rival faction party, among other things, would be frozen. Will take over everything except CJI Chandrachud said, “This will not disturb the hearing of the constitution bench as three judges are waiting for them.”
He said he would complete the constitution bench hearing on Maharashtra’s political crisis and thereafter hear on Wednesday the petition challenging the election symbol of the Election Commission of India. The court said that it would read the matter first. Shiv Sena’s Uddhav Thackeray-led faction has moved the Supreme Court challenging the Election Commission’s move to allot the name ‘Shiv Sena’ and ‘bow and arrow’ symbol to the rival faction led by CM Shinde. Uddhav, in his petition filed on Monday, said that the ECI failed to consider that his faction enjoys majority in the Legislative Council and Rajya Sabha.
Uddhav Thackeray’s plea,
In the petition, Uddhav Thackeray also said that mere legislative majority in this matter cannot be the basis for the Election Commission to pass an order. Challenging the EC’s decision, Uddhav Thackeray said that the poll panel was wrong in its decision and that, “the entire structure of the impugned order (EC’s decision) is based on the purported legislative majority of the respondent (Shinde) which is a The issue is to be determined by the apex court in the constitution bench.”
“The ECI has failed to consider that the petitioner enjoys majority in the Legislative Council (12 out of 12) and Rajya Sabha (3 out of 3). It is submitted that in such a case where the opposite is also the case. The Legislative Majority i.e. Lok Sabha on the one hand and Rajya Sabha on the other as well as the Legislative Assembly and the Legislative Council, in particular, having regard to the fact that the said members are likely to lose their right of membership, the Legislative Majority alone shall determine whether There is no safe guide as to who holds the majority for the purposes of adjudicating a petition for token order,” the plea said.
“Under these circumstances, it is respectfully submitted that the legislative majority test cannot be the test which can be applied for the purposes of determination of the present dispute,” it added. Uddhav Thackeray said that the Election Commission made a mistake in saying that there was a split in the political party, saying that “in the absence of any evidence and evidence that there is a split in the political party, the conclusion of the Election Commission is completely on this”. It is wrong.” floor”.
“The test of legislative majority adopted by the ECI was not applicable at all in view of the fact that disqualification proceedings were pending against the MLAs who supported the respondent. If in the disqualification proceedings, the MLAs are disqualified, So there is no question of these MLAs forming a majority again. Thus, the very basis of the impugned order is constitutionally suspect,” the EC said.
Uddhav submitted that the Election Commission has failed to understand that he enjoys overwhelming support in the rank and file of the party. He said his faction has an overwhelming majority in the ‘House of Representatives’, the apex representative body representing the wishes of the primary members and other stakeholders of the party. The House of Representatives is recognized as the apex body under Article VIII of the party constitution. Questioning the Election Commission, the former Maharashtra CM said the poll panel has defied the constitutionality test by saying that the party’s constitution cannot be held sacrosanct as it cannot be called ‘democratic’. Uddhav further said that the Election Commission has failed to discharge its duties as a neutral arbiter of disputes and has acted in a manner undermining its constitutional status.
“Under these circumstances, it is respectfully submitted that the legislative majority test cannot be the test which can be applied for the purposes of determination of the present dispute,” it added. Uddhav Thackeray said that the Election Commission made a mistake in saying that there was a split in the political party, saying that “in the absence of any evidence and evidence that there has been a split in the political party, the conclusion of the Election Commission is completely on this”. It is wrong.” floor”.
“The test of legislative majority adopted by the ECI was not applicable at all in view of the fact that disqualification proceedings were pending against the MLAs who supported the respondent. If in the disqualification proceedings, the MLAs are disqualified, So there is no question of these MLAs forming a majority again. Thus, the very basis of the impugned order is constitutionally suspect,” the EC said.
Uddhav submitted that the Election Commission has failed to understand that he enjoys overwhelming support in the rank and file of the party. He said his faction has an overwhelming majority in the ‘House of Representatives’, the apex representative body representing the wishes of the primary members and other stakeholders of the party.
The House of Representatives is recognized as the apex body under Article VIII of the party constitution. Questioning the Election Commission, the former Maharashtra CM said that the poll panel has defied constitutionalism by saying that the party’s constitution cannot be held sacrosanct as it cannot be called ‘democratic’. Uddhav further said that the Election Commission has failed to discharge its duties as a neutral arbiter of disputes and has acted in a manner undermining its constitutional status.
(with inputs from agencies)