Uddhav Thackeray Group Moves Supreme Court Against Speaker’s ‘Real Shiv Sena’ Order
Maharashtra speaker Rahul Narwekar’s decision to dismiss the disqualification petitions against chief minister Eknath Shinde and 38 rebel Shiv Sena legislators has been challenged in the Supreme Court by the Uddhav Thackeray-led faction of the Shiv Sena. The petition argues that the speaker’s order was a misuse of power and based on irrelevant considerations. The faction’s chief whip, Sunil Prabhu, stated that the order went against the anti-defection law and the Supreme Court’s previous judgment, which highlighted the need to differentiate between a legislative party and a political party when making such decisions.
The petition specifically names Eknath Shinde as the respondent and requests an urgent listing of the case. It argues that the speaker’s decision to determine the real Shiv Sena based solely on legislative majority is a violation of the law laid down by the Supreme Court. The Uddhav Thackeray faction points to the court’s previous ruling that a political party and a legislative party should not be conflated.
The split within the Shiv Sena occurred in 2022, with Shinde and 39 other legislators leaving the party to join forces with the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). Last year, the Supreme Court invalidated the Maharashtra governor’s decision to ask Uddhav Thackeray to face a floor test, citing various errors in the political events that unfolded. However, the court left it to Narwekar to decide the pending disqualification petitions against both factions of the party.
The petition filed by the Uddhav Thackeray faction argues that the speaker’s ruling is a misuse of power and goes against the Supreme Court’s previous decision, which tasked the speaker with deciding on disqualification pleas. The petition emphasizes that the speaker’s decision is based on irrelevant considerations and a flawed understanding of the Shiv Sena’s leadership structure. It criticizes the speaker for neglecting the fact that the Shinde faction colluded with the BJP, evident from Shinde becoming Chief Minister with BJP’s support.
Furthermore, the petition faults the speaker for not recognizing the disqualification of the Uddhav Thackeray faction despite the clear violation of the Tenth Schedule, which prohibits legislators from entering into political alliances contrary to their party’s alliance. The petition concludes by urging the court to set aside the speaker’s orders.
This legal battle within the Shiv Sena sheds light on the complexities of political party dynamics and the interpretation of the Tenth Schedule. It remains to be seen how the Supreme Court will respond to the Uddhav Thackeray faction’s petition and whether it will have any implications for the state’s political landscape.
