Full Breakdown
Supreme Court Scrutinizes Legislative-Majority Test in Shiv Sena Symbol Dispute
By Drooid · · How we work
Core Event – Court Questions Whether Legislative Strength Alone Determines Party Ownership
The Supreme Court on Thursday examined the propriety of using a legislative-majority test to decide which faction of the Shiv Sena is the “real” party and entitled to the bow-and-arrow election symbol. A three-judge bench led by Chief Justice Surya Kant, with Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana, asked whether the Election Commission (EC) had fully considered alternative criteria, especially given pending disqualification proceedings against several MLAs.
Background & Context
The Shiv Sena split in mid-2022 when Eknath Shinde’s group claimed the support of the majority of the party’s legislators, prompting a realignment of the state government. The EC, in early 2023, recognised the Shinde faction as the official Shiv Sena and allotted it the reserved bow-and-arrow symbol. The Maharashtra Assembly speaker later affirmed that the Shinde-led MLAs constituted the party in the legislature. The Uddhav Thackeray-led faction subsequently adopted a new torch symbol.
Data & Statistics
- Legislative strength: The Shinde faction comprises 40 MLAs, accounting for roughly 76 % of the votes cast for all 55 Shiv Sena winners in the 2019 Maharashtra Assembly election.
- Parliamentary strength: Thirteen MPs aligned with Shinde obtained about 73 % of the votes for the party’s 18 elected MPs in the 2019 Lok Sabha election.
These figures were presented by senior advocate Neeraj Kishan Kaul, representing the Shinde faction.
Official Statements & Responses
Justice Bagchi noted that while legislative majority is a relevant indicator, it may not be a “safe test” when the legislators themselves face disqualification. The bench emphasized that the EC’s discretion must be examined for completeness, but the court will not substitute its own judgment for that of the poll panel. The speaker, Rahul Narwekar, was instructed not to rely solely on a blind count of legislators when determining party identity. The EC defended its approach, arguing that the legislative-majority test was the only workable option after evaluating the party’s constitution, organisational structure, and vote-share data.
Criticism & Opposition
The Uddhav Thackeray-led faction maintains that the Shinde group’s use of the Shiv Sena name and bow-and-arrow symbol is illegitimate and has urged the Supreme Court to either restore the symbol to its side or restrain the Shinde faction pending a final determination.
Verbatim Quotes
- “Will that be a correct reflection?” — Justice Joymalya Bagchi
- “Neither group needed to be given the advantage of the reserved symbol. Both groups could have been directed to select different symbols and contest on their own strength, not on Balasaheb’s strength,” — Justice Bagchi
- “The EC is not striking down internal elections or deciding who was rightly or wrongly elected in the manner of a civil court,” — Neeraj Kishan Kaul
Conflicting Reports & Gaps
The court’s questioning reveals a tension between two positions: the EC’s reliance on legislative majority as a “workable test” versus the court’s view that the test should not be decisive when legislators’ status is contested. No quantitative disagreement appears in the sources, but the legal adequacy of the test remains unsettled.
What’s Next – Continued Hearings
The Supreme Court has scheduled the next hearing for September 22. The bench will further assess whether the EC considered denying the reserved symbol to both factions and directing them to contest elections under separate symbols.