SC warns Sena (UBT) against ‘irresponsible’ remarks on pending dispute with Shinde faction

A bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant and justice Joymalya Bagchi said the delay was not on account of the court but the refusal by lawyers on both sides to argue the case

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Friday strongly objected to public statements made by the Uddhav Thackeray-led Shiv Sena (UBT) blaming the judiciary for delays in hearing its long-pending dispute with the Eknath Shinde faction over disqualification proceedings and control of the party’s name and symbol.

The Uddhav Thackeray-led Shiv Sena faction has challenged the Election Commission of India’s (ECI) February 2023 decision to allot the undivided Shiv Sena’s name and its iconic bow-and-arrow symbol to the Eknath Shinde-led faction. (Raju Shinde/HT Archives)

Posting the matter for hearing on July 30, a bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant and justice Joymalya Bagchi said that such statements were “irresponsible, as the delay was not on account of the court but the refusal by lawyers on both sides to argue the case.

Taking up appeals filed by Thackeray and his party’s chief whip, Sunil Prabhu, the bench said, “We will list the matter if you people will stop going to [the] media and make statements.”

Expressing strong displeasure, the court said the legal counsels were seeking adjournments or specific dates, while party leaders were blaming the court for not taking up the matter. “Be careful. We are warning you. When we fix a date, you do not argue, and you go to the media saying no hearing is taking place,” the bench said.

Senior advocates Mukul Rohatgi and Devadatt Kamat, appearing for the Shinde and Thackeray factions respectively, also distanced themselves from the public statements made by party leaders. They said the court has always been kind and generous in accommodating requests for a hearing of the case, and such comments were unwarranted.

The bench replied, “We understand whatever delay that has happened... But such irresponsible statements are being made. We are deciding cases everyday till 4 pm. If somebody finds us sitting idle, we can understand.”

The court even offered to hear the case on Friday itself. However, Kamat told the court that both sides would need two hours to submit their arguments. Both Kamat and Rohatgi then jointly requested the bench to hear the matter in July, when the court reopens after partial working days.

The bench posted the matter for July 30 and said, “On the next date, be ready. We expect cooperation from both sides.”

The two Shiv Sena factions had approached the top court following the party’s split, which resulted in the fall of the Thackeray-led Maha Vikas Aghadi government in June 2022. This led to Shinde becoming Maharashtra’s chief minister on June 30, 2022, with support from the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).

The Thackeray faction had approached the Supreme Court challenging the Maharashtra governor’s decision to call for a floor test. In May 2023, the court held that the governor was not justified in calling for a trust vote, as there was no material to show that Thackeray had lost the confidence of the House.

However, the court declined to restore the Thackeray government since he had resigned before the floor test could take place. The Shiv Sena (UBT) then moved disqualification petitions and challenged the delay by the Maharashtra assembly speaker to decide on the same.

The Thackeray faction has also challenged the Election Commission of India’s (ECI) February 2023 decision to allot the undivided Shiv Sena’s name and its iconic bow-and-arrow symbol to the Shinde-led faction.

The ECI employed the yardstick of finding out the majority of each faction in the legislative wing. The Shinde faction enjoyed the support of 40 of the 55 MLAs, which translated to 76% of the total votes polled by the undivided party in the 2019 assembly elections. Further, the poll panel noted that 13 of the 18 Lok Sabha members of Shiv Sena were on Shinde’s side, translating to 73% of the total votes polled in the 2019 Lok Sabha elections.

However, the Thackeray faction pointed out that the ECI failed to note that the Shiv Sena constitution recognises the Pratinidhi Sabha as the party’s apex representative body, where Thackeray enjoyed the support of 160 of the 200 members. It accused the ECI of failing to discharge its duties as a “neutral arbiter” under the Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order, 1968.

The matter was last heard in March, when both sides provided their submissions in writing, and was kept for hearing in April. However, due to the Constitution bench hearings, the bench headed by the CJI could not take up the case.