NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Tuesday agreed to hear on Wednesday a plea by Uddhav Thackeray's group against the Election Commission's final order of February 17 recognising Eknath Shinde's faction as the real Shiv Sena and allotting it 'bow and arrow' symbol.
A bench of Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud and Justice P S Narasimha scheduled the matter for consideration on February 22 at 3.30 pm.
Senior advocate Kapil Sibal mentioned the matter for urgent hearing.
On behalf of Thackeray faction, Sibal said if the matter was not heard urgently and stayed, the other side would take over the party office, bank accounts and initiate disqualification proceedings.
Senior advocate Neeraj Kishan Kaul, appearing for the Shinde's group contended that he would like to argue as to how the matter was not be heard here as twice the petitioner's side had approached the Delhi High Court in the subject matter.
The Thackeray faction on Monday filed the petition against the EC's order claiming the poll panel had failed to discharge its constitutional duty to act as neutral arbiter of the dispute.
On February 17, the Election Commission, in its final order, said the party name Shiv Sena and symbol would be retained by Shinde, present Chief Minister of the state.
Shinde, along with his supporting MLAs, had joined hands with the BJP, forcing Thackeray to resign as Chief Minister of Maharashtra.
In the plea filed through advocate Amit Anand Tiwari, the Thackeray group said the EC has failed to appreciate that petitioner enjoyed overwhelming support in the rank and file of the party and in the Pratinidhi Sabha, the apex representative body of the primary members and other stakeholders of the party.
The EC disregarded the party Constitution of 2018 on the ground that it was undemocratic and that it was not communicated to it. These observations are totally erroneous as the amendments in the Constitution were categorically communicated in 2018 itself and the petitioner will place clear evidence in this regard, the plea said, seeking interim stay on the EC order.
The plea also contended that the test of legislative majority adopted by the EC could not have been applied at all in view of the fact that the disqualification proceedings were pending against the legislators supporting Shinde.
