Read Time: 06 minutes

Synopsis

The Supreme Court on Wednesday refused to stay the order passed by the Election Commission of India allowing the Eknath Shinde-led faction to use the name 'Shiv Sena' and the symbol of 'bow and arrow'. The bench said that it could not allow a stay as the Eknath Shinde faction had succeeded before the Election Commission.

A bench of Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justice PS Narasimha and Justice JB Pardiwala issued notice in the matter and allowed the liberty granted by the Election Commission to the Uddhav Thackeray faction to use the flaming torch symbol till the completion of the upcoming bye-elections.

The bench was hearing a plea filed by Uddhav Thackeray faction against an order passed by the Election Commission of India allowing the Eknath Shinde-led faction to use the name 'Shiv Sena' and the symbol of 'bow and arrow'.

The plea was filed against the order passed by Chief Election Commissioner Rajiv Kumar and Election Commissioners Anup Chandra Pandey and Arun Goel in a plea filed by Eknath Shinde. 

Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal appearing for the Uddhav Thackeray faction argued that the order of the Election Commission had been passed on the basis of the majority test and not the organization. Sibal argued that they have 40 members and that's how the symbol is given to them. In Rajya Sabha, we (Thackeray faction) have the majority but because of these 40, they were given the symbol, he said.

Whereas, Senior Advocate Neeraj Kishan Kaul appearing for the Eknath Shinde faction objected to the maintainability of the petition and argued, "It was never our case that a legislator party is not integral to a political party. Under the 10th schedule, a legislative party means a political party. There is no barometer in the political party to judge what to do".

Additionally, Senior Advocate Maninder Singh appearing for the Shinde faction submitted that 'Political Party' is not defined anywhere, it's just a recognised political party under the Election Commission.

However, Sibal argued that "by the time they are taking over our offices, we can be allowed a status quo. They can take over bank accounts, properties, etc."

Given the above, the bench took note of the argument made by Kaul that they'll not take any action. The bench allowed one week's time for the Shinde faction to file their reply and one week for the Thackeray faction to file a rejoinder thereafter.

The order of the Election Commission of India came after Eknath Shinde had approached the Election Commission with a plea to decide who the real Shiv Sena is. Earlier the Supreme Court had rejected the plea of Uddhav Thackeray led Shiv Sena to seek a stay on the proceedings of the Election Commission.

Eknath Shinde, leader of the Shiv Sena had rebelled against the former Chief Minister Uddhav Thackeray with 40 other MLA's which led to the fall of the Maha Vikas Aghadi (MVA) government. Eknath Shinde, is currently the Chief Minister of Maharashtra.

Case Title: Uddhav Thackeray Vs. Eknath Sambhaji Shinde & Anr.