Uddhav altered Sena’s structure: Shinde camp

The Eknath Shinde-led faction told the Supreme Court on Wednesday that the organisational structure established by Shiv Sena founder Balasaheb Thackeray to prevent the concentration of power in the hands of the party chief and make it more “democratic” was significantly altered by Uddhav Thackeray in 2018.

A bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana was told by senior advocate Neeraj Kishan Kaul, appearing for the Shinde-led faction, that the party constitution was submitted to the Election Commission in 1999 after the poll body directed all political parties to place their constitutions on record.

After the demise of Balasaheb Thackeray, the party proceeded to fundamentally alter that structure, Kaul submitted.

“One of the principle arguments sought to be raised is that ECI embarked and created an unknown jurisdiction of looking into party Constitution. From 1994 in various orders, ECI has been writing to all political parties — either through correspondences or through orders passed that you must have democratic constitutions.

“Parties ought to ensure that party constitutions are democratic. Shiv Sena at some stage came and said that our constitution does not permit elections. ECI convinced Shiv Sena and amended constitution came into being. After that, suddenly in 2018, new constitution emerges,” Kaul said.

The senior advocate also submitted that Balasaheb Thackeray’s son Uddhav Thackeray amended the constitution and placed power in the hands of the party chief. He further argued that the party didn’t place the amended constitution on the commission’s record.

“Our case has been repeatedly that there was discontent in the party. For reasons best known to petitioners, they aligned with those who were diametrically opposite to Shiv Sena. Ultimately, people said this can’t go on. Then we made a case that we were original Shiv Sena,” Kaul submitted. The senior lawyer told the court that Election Commission has rightly held that the legislative majority was the appropriate test to determine who commands the majority within a political party. The hearing remained inconclusive and will continue on September 15.

The Uddhav Thackeray-led faction had earlier told the apex court that the use of the name of ‘Shiv Sena’ and its election symbol by the Eknath Shinde-led group was “illegitimate”. The top court was urged to at least prevent the Shinde group from using them if it does not immediately restore the symbol to the Thackeray faction. The bench was also told that the MLAs of the Shinde-led group, facing disqualification proceedings on account of alleged defection, cannot take the defence that they constitute the original political party.

Senior advocates Kapil Sibal and Devadatt Kamat, appearing for the Thackeray faction, had said that recognising the Shinde-led camp as the “real” party would amount to rewarding a “constitutional sin”. The bench was hearing two pleas filed in 2024 by the Thackeray faction against the EC’s order allotting the ‘bow-and-arrow’ symbol to the Shinde camp.

The pleas have also challenged the February 17, 2023 order of the poll authority, recognising the Shinde faction as the original Shiv Sena.