SC refuses urgent hearing to plea against merger of six rebel Uddhav MPs with Shinde sena

The Supreme Court refused to urgently list a plea filed against the Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla’s recent decision to recognise the merger of six rebel Uddhav Thackeray-led Shiv Sena MPs with the Eknath Shinde-led Shiv Sena, sources said here on Tuesday.

The sources said that Senior Advocate Devdatt Kamat, who represented the Uddhav Thackeray-led Shiv Sena, mentioned the matter before a bench comprising Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice Pancholi for urgent listing.

Advertisement

The writ petition, filed by the Uddhav Thackeray-led Shiv Sena under Article 32 of the Constitution, names the Lok Sabha Speaker, the Joint Secretary of the Lok Sabha Secretariat, and the six rebel MPs—Bhausaheb Wakchaure, Nagesh Patil Ashtikar, Omprakash Raje Nimbalkar, Sanjay Bandu Jadhav, Sanjay Deshmukh and Sanjay Dina Patil—as respondents.

“This is an important matter. The Lok Sabha Speaker has recognised the merger of 6 MPs with the rival party. This shows the importance of a constitutional position. The Lok Sabha Speaker recognised the merger on late Saturday night and it has brought parliamentary function of the party to a standstill,” Senior Advocate Kamat who represents the Uddhav Thackeray-led Shiv Sena told the bench.

“We don’t know about tomorrow. But we will list it,” Chief Justice of India Surya Kant said.

Earlier, Uddhav-led Shiv Sena leader Arvind Sawant had approached the Supreme Court challenging Lok Sabha Speaker’s July 18 decision to recognise the merger of the six rebel MPs who had defected and 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, senior Uddhav Thackeray-led Shiv Sena leader Sawant argued that the 2024 Lok Sabha election campaign centred around Eknath Shinde’s alleged hijacking of Balasaheb Thackeray’s legacy through illegal means and unconstitutionally orchestrated defections, sources said.

The Uddhav Thackeray-led Shiv Sena petition contended that voters elected the six rebel MPs based on the Uddhav-led Shiv Sena’s campaign and leadership.

The petition contended that within two years of getting elected on Uddhav Thackeray-led Shiv Sena tickets, the MPs allegedly betrayed the faith reposed in them by claiming a “merger” with the Eknath Shinde-led Shiv Sena.

The Uddhav Thackeray-led Shiv Sena plea contended that such a merger, based solely on unilateral claims by elected MPs without any consent of their parent political party, has no constitutional or legal sanction.

The Uddhav-led Sena petition also described the move by the 6 rebel MPs as a blatant affront to the concept of parliamentary democracy, which is founded on the functioning of political parties.

The Uddhav Thackeray-led Sena’s plea also referred to paragraphs 2(1)(a) and 2(1)(b) of the Tenth Schedule of the Constitution of India, pointing out that the anti-defection law provides for disqualification whenever an elected representative voluntarily gives up membership of the original political party or acts contrary to party directions in the house.

It argued that the Tenth Schedule recognises the concept of merger only as a defence in disqualification proceedings. In the present case, however, no disqualification proceedings have yet been initiated by Shiv Sena (UBT) against the six MPs, sources said

The Uddhav Thackeray-led Sena’s plea contended that the Lok Sabha Speaker’s approval of the merger of the 6 rebel MPs has departed from constitutional provisions, and thus constitutes a gross illegality and substantive unconstitutionality, which violates Article 14 of the Constitution, sources said.