Political Mergers Or Defection? Kapil Sibal Moves Supreme Court Over Interpretation Of Constitution's Tenth Schedule

Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal has moved a petition before the Supreme Court raising concerns over law against political defection is being rendered ineffective.

Sibal mentioned his plea before a Bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant led bench today. "What is happening in this country? If this continues, 10th Schedule will become...There is a another plea listed," Sibal said. 

Sibal further told court that the Parliament is being altered by these so called political mergers. The plea has challenged an interpretation of the Tenth Schedule which allows splinter groups to escape the anti-defection law by adopting the route of merger.

The 10th Schedule of Indian Constitution, added through the 52nd Amendment in 1985, is the Anti-Defection Law. This law was brought in to curb political defections, a growing problem at the time and to ensure elected representatives remained loyal to the party on whose ticket they won.

Originally, the Tenth Schedule recognised a 'split' in a legislature party if at least one-third members formed a new group or joined another party. But, after the 91st Amendment which came into force in 2004, the law recognises a 'merger' that requires at least two-third members of a legislature party to join another one or form a new one without falling foul of the anti-defection law.

In a related development, the Supreme Court today also issued notice on a plea filed by Shiv Sena (UBT) leader and Lok Sabha MP Arvind Sawant challenging the Lok Sabha Speaker's July 18 decision recognising the actions of six Shiv Sena (UBT) MPs who sought to "merge" themselves with the rival Shiv Sena faction led by Maharashtra Deputy Chief Minister Eknath Shinde.

Shiv Sena (UBT) leader Arvind Sawant has approached the Supreme Court challenging Lok Sabha Speaker's July 18 decision recognising the actions of six MPs who unilaterally sought to "merge" themselves with the rival Shiv Sena faction led by former Maharashtra Chief Minister Eknath Shinde.

Challenging a circular issued by the Joint Secretary of the Lok Sabha Secretariat as ex facie unconstitutional, illegal and perverse, Sawant, who is the parliamentary party leader of Shiv Sena (UBT), argued that the 2024 Lok Sabha election campaign centred around Eknath Shinde's alleged usurpation of Balasaheb Thackeray's legacy through illegal means and unconstitutionally orchestrated defections.

According to the petition, the electorate chose the six MPs after accepting the Shiv Sena (UBT)'s campaign and leadership. However, within two years of being elected, the MPs allegedly betrayed the faith reposed in them by claiming to "merge" with the rival Shiv Sena led by Shinde. The plea contended that such a merger, based solely on unilateral claims by legislators and without the consent of their parent political party, has no constitutional or legal sanction. It described the move as a blatant affront to the concept of parliamentary democracy, which is founded on the functioning of political parties.

Referring to Paragraphs 2(1)(a) and 2(1)(b) of the Tenth Schedule, the petition said the anti-defection law provides for disqualification when a legislator voluntarily gives up membership of the original political party or acts contrary to its directions in the House. It argued that the Tenth Schedule recognises the concept of merger only as a defence in disqualification proceedings.

Mentioning Date: July 22, 2026

Bench: CJI Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V Mohana