The rebellion within the Shiv Sena resulted in the collapse of the Maha Vikas Aghadi government, and Eknath Shinde's faction formed a new government with the BJP.
The Supreme Courton Thursday critically examined the Maharashtra Speaker”s ruling in the Sena vs Sena dispute, which declared Eknath Shinde”s faction as the “real Sena” based solely on its “discernible legislative majority”. The bench led by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud questioned whether this conclusion aligned with the court”s previous instructions.
The proceedings involved pleas from the faction led by Uddhav Thackeray, challenging Speaker Rahul Narwekar”s decision not to disqualify the MLAs, including Shinde, who had switched allegiance to the BJP.
In response to allegations of forgery by the Shinde faction, the court ordered the Speaker”s office to produce all original records to the disqualification pleas filed by Thackeray”s camp. It also instructed Shinde”s camp to submit a reply by April 1st. The court scheduled the next hearing for the second week of the same month, where it would also consider objections raised by the Shinde side regarding the jurisdiction of the top court in this matter.
The court emphasised that it was deliberating the issue of the petition”s maintainability. On January 10, Rahul Narwekar ruled in favour of the Shinde faction, designating it as the “real Shiv Sena.” Narwekar”s decision was based solely on the legislative strength of the Shinde camp, which he noted as having 37 out of 55 seats won by the then-united Sena in the 2019 Assembly election.
However, the Supreme Court had in May last year cautioned against basing decisions solely on numerical majority, noting that determining the “real Sena” transcends mere numbers.
Thackeray, visibly dismayed by Narwekar”s decision, criticised it as an “insult to the Supreme Court” and deemed it a “murder of democracy.” He accused the Speaker of granting undue power to Eknath Shinde, whom he referred to as a “thief,” thereby exceeding the court”s mandate.
“He distorted the framework provided by the court into something entirely different… he appears to believe he is above the Supreme Court. Instead of addressing the need for stricter laws against party-hopping, he seemed more focused on paving his own way,” he remarked, highlighting Narwekar”s history of switching parties multiple times.
Following the split in June 2022, both factions exchanged a flurry of disqualification notices against each other. The Thackeray faction aimed to disqualify up to 40 MLAs from the Shinde camp, while the latter sought the disqualification of 14 rivals. Despite these actions, the Speaker dismissed all petitions.
In the 2019 elections, the undivided Shiv Sena contested 22 out of 48 seats, securing victory in 18, including three in Mumbai. However, shortly after the state polls, Uddhav Thackeray”s party severed its 25-year alliance with the BJP due to disagreements over power-sharing terms. Subsequently, Uddhav Thackeray”s Shiv Sena, along with Sharad Pawar”s NCP and the Congress, formed an alliance named Maha Vikas Aghadi, despite their ideological differences.
The rebellion within the Shiv Sena resulted in the collapse of the Maha Vikas Aghadi government, and Eknath Shinde”s faction formed a new government with the BJP.
