.jpg)
Will Shinde Lose the 'Chief Leader' Post? Thackeray Faction Makes Strong Arguments in Supreme Court
Mumbai/New Delhi: During the ongoing Supreme Court hearing regarding the Shiv Sena party symbol and name, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, representing the Uddhav Thackeray faction, raised serious questions regarding Eknath Shinde’s position as 'Chief Leader' (Mukhya Neta).
Sibal asked the Court, "Under which provision of the party constitution did Eknath Shinde assume the post of Chief Leader?" Citing relevant clauses of the party constitution, he pointed out that clear rules regarding the Chief Leader post had been in place since 1999. The Thackeray faction argued that since the Shinde faction accepted this post after the split, the appointment is invalid under the party's constitutional provisions.
Election Commission is Merely a Tribunal
Kapil Sibal raised another significant point, stating that the Election Commission functions merely as a tribunal. He questioned the relevance of this role regarding 'Paragraph 15' concerning the validity of the party constitution. The Thackeray faction claimed that the Shinde faction violated crucial provisions of the party constitution while securing the party symbol and name.
According to the arguments presented by the Thackeray faction in court, Shinde’s acceptance of the Chief Leader post following the split was a major error. It was asserted that accepting this position was not permissible under the rules applicable to the party since 1999.
The Shinde faction has also presented its arguments during the hearing, and the Supreme Court will deliver its final verdict after considering the submissions from both sides. The ruling on who retains the Shiv Sena party symbol (Bow and Arrow) and name will be of great significance.
Mumbai/New Delhi: During the ongoing Supreme Court hearing regarding the Shiv Sena party symbol and name, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, representing the Uddhav Thackeray faction, raised serious questions regarding Eknath Shinde’s position as 'Chief Leader' (Mukhya Neta).
Sibal asked the Court, "Under which provision of the party constitution did Eknath Shinde assume the post of Chief Leader?" Citing relevant clauses of the party constitution, he pointed out that clear rules regarding the Chief Leader post had been in place since 1999. The Thackeray faction argued that since the Shinde faction accepted this post after the split, the appointment is invalid under the party's constitutional provisions.
Election Commission is Merely a Tribunal
Kapil Sibal raised another significant point, stating that the Election Commission functions merely as a tribunal. He questioned the relevance of this role regarding 'Paragraph 15' concerning the validity of the party constitution. The Thackeray faction claimed that the Shinde faction violated crucial provisions of the party constitution while securing the party symbol and name.
According to the arguments presented by the Thackeray faction in court, Shinde’s acceptance of the Chief Leader post following the split was a major error. It was asserted that accepting this position was not permissible under the rules applicable to the party since 1999.
The Shinde faction has also presented its arguments during the hearing, and the Supreme Court will deliver its final verdict after considering the submissions from both sides. The ruling on who retains the Shiv Sena party symbol (Bow and Arrow) and name will be of great significance.
Sibal asked the Court, "Under which provision of the party constitution did Eknath Shinde assume the post of Chief Leader?" Citing relevant clauses of the party constitution, he pointed out that clear rules regarding the Chief Leader post had been in place since 1999. The Thackeray faction argued that since the Shinde faction accepted this post after the split, the appointment is invalid under the party's constitutional provisions.
Election Commission is Merely a Tribunal
Kapil Sibal raised another significant point, stating that the Election Commission functions merely as a tribunal. He questioned the relevance of this role regarding 'Paragraph 15' concerning the validity of the party constitution. The Thackeray faction claimed that the Shinde faction violated crucial provisions of the party constitution while securing the party symbol and name.
According to the arguments presented by the Thackeray faction in court, Shinde’s acceptance of the Chief Leader post following the split was a major error. It was asserted that accepting this position was not permissible under the rules applicable to the party since 1999.
The Shinde faction has also presented its arguments during the hearing, and the Supreme Court will deliver its final verdict after considering the submissions from both sides. The ruling on who retains the Shiv Sena party symbol (Bow and Arrow) and name will be of great significance.
