Supreme Court issues notices on Shiv Sena (UBT) MPs merger plea

The Supreme Court issued notices to the Lok Sabha Speaker's office and six rebel Shiv Sena (UBT) MPs on Arvind Sawant's plea challenging their merger with the Eknath Shinde-led Shiv Sena. The court, however, declined to stay the Speaker's decision

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Wednesday issued notices to the Lok Sabha Speaker’s office and six rebel Shiv Sena (UBT) MPs on a plea filed by Shiv Sena (UBT) leader Arvind Sawant challenging the Speaker’s decision recognising their merger with the Eknath Shinde-led Shiv Sena under the anti-defection law.

A Bench of Justices PS Narasimha and Alok Aradhe sought responses from the respondents and posted the matter for further hearing after two weeks.

---

The notices were issued to the Lok Sabha Speaker, the Joint Secretary and six MPs – Bhausaheb Waghchaure, Nagesh Patil Ashtikar, Omprakash Raje Nimbalkar, Sanjay Bandu Jadhav, Sanjay Deshmukh and Sanjay Dina Patil.

However, the apex court declined to stay Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla’s decision recognising the merger of the six MPs with the Shinde faction.

The petition, filed by Sawant, contends that the Speaker’s decision has severely affected the functioning of the Shiv Sena (UBT) as a political party in Parliament by reducing its strength in the Lok Sabha from nine MPs to three following the recognition of the merger.

Sawant has challenged the constitutional validity of the Speaker’s decision recognising the merger under Paragraph 4 of the Tenth Schedule, arguing that no merger of the original political party had taken place and, therefore, the legislature party could not claim the benefit of the merger provision to escape disqualification under the anti-defection law.

The dispute traces its origins to the defection of six of the nine Shiv Sena (UBT) Lok Sabha MPs, who approached the Lok Sabha Speaker seeking recognition of their merger with the Eknath Shinde-led Shiv Sena after claiming that they constituted the required two-thirds of the legislature party under the Tenth Schedule.

Before the Speaker passed the order, Shiv Sena (UBT) had opposed any such recognition, asserting that party president Uddhav Thackeray had neither initiated nor approved any merger of the original political party with the Shinde faction.

The party had maintained that under Paragraph 4 of the Tenth Schedule, legislators cannot independently bring about a merger of a political party and can only accept or reject a merger initiated by the original political party.

Despite these objections, Speaker Om Birla recognised the merger of the six MPs with the Shinde-led Shiv Sena, following which they ceased to be recognised as members of the Shiv Sena (UBT) Parliamentary Party.

Meanwhile, senior advocate Kapil Sibal has also moved the apex court by filing a separate writ petition challenging the prevailing interpretation of Paragraph 4 of the Tenth Schedule, contending that it enables splinter groups of legislators to avoid disqualification through mergers, thereby defeating the very purpose of the anti-defection law.

Mentioning the matter before a Bench headed by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Sibal said that if the present trend continued, “the Tenth Schedule will become meaningless”.

His plea has been filed against the Union of India and seeks a re-examination of the constitutional interpretation governing political mergers under the anti-defection law.