After two days of arguments, the Delhi High Court Tuesday dismissed former Maharashtra chief minister Uddhav Thackeray’s plea against the interim order of the Election Commission of India freezing claim to the “Shiv Sena” party name and the “bow and arrow” symbol.A single judge bench of Justice Sanjeev Narula further directed the commission to decide the issue before it in an “expeditious manner”. The court also observed that an expeditious disposal of the issue would be in the interest of the parties as well as the public, noting that there was no “interdict” on the matter by the Supreme Court. Detailed order of the court will be followed.On day two, senior counsel Kapil Sibal appearing for Thackeray argued that the ECI at the outset should have realised that it can’t assume that there are two factions of the same party.“Petition before the commission has only been filed by Eknath Shinde; the ECI can’t assume that he is a part of the Shiv Sena. That is yet to be considered,” Sibal said.He argued that even while passing an interim freezing order, the ECI should have heard his client as it has done in various orders before it. “Never before has the ECI ever passed an order of freezing a symbol without hearing the parties,” Sibal contended.He further took the high court through the timeline of the matter, beginning from July 19 when Shinde approached the ECI laying claim on the name and symbol. Sibal said that on several occasions, his client asked the ECI to provide the documents filed by Shinde in the matter, however, the same was not provided to him.He said that the ECI, after several requests, provided his client with a Google link of the documents without the password on October 4 which was given after his client again contacted the body. “On October 7 I file my preliminary reply and I apply for oral hearing. They (ECI) say to me that please file a reply by tomorrow and did not grant me an oral hearing. I wrote to them saying that this conduct of yours as ECI is malicious,” Sibal submitted.“I can’t expect any justice there,” Sibal said in regard to the conduct of the ECI in his case. “Could he have frozen the symbol without hearing me? What is this hurry to freeze the symbol? It is an interim order which freezes the symbol which I’m entitled to. You (ECI) don’t supply the documents, you don’t hear me and then they say there is no time. This order must be set aside,” he added.On the other hand, senior counsel Rajiv Nayar, appearing for Eknath Shinde, said that the conduct of Uddhav Thackeray before the commission has to be highlighted because he “does not actually want a resolution”.“All he has done is ask for time. The commission was kind enough to grant time to Mr. Vivek Singh (Thackeray’s lawyer before ECI). Six different opportunities were availed by Singh on behalf of the petitioner,” Nayar argued while taking the court through several dates on which Thackeray’s counsel sought time before the commission.“Therefore, who is wanting delay here? Who is wanting resolution this court may see. Obviously, you (Thackeray) don’t want expeditious disposal because you want the symbol to remain in jeopardy,” Nayar said.Nayar added that the commission was trying to balance the case between the two factions and only as an interim measure it froze the symbols in the interest of both parties.Adding to Shinde’s arguments, senior counsel Neeraj Kishan Kaul submitted that the ECI has the authority to pass interim orders which have been upheld by the Supreme Court. He said the ECI can decide the matter as it thinks fit. “Today for the High Court to interfere in the exercise of its extraordinary jurisdiction will be respectfully a travesty of justice,” Kaul said.Sidhant Kumar, advocate appearing for the Election Commission, countered Sibal’s arguments and said that “malicious allegations were made against a constitutional body” although the freezing orders have been passed before.In a matter of allotment of symbols, the entire authority is vested with the election commission, Kumar said, adding that the commission has to be satisfied with the existence of the dispute which happened when Shinde approached the commission in July. He further said that there has been no breach of fair play for the court to interfere in the matter. “We will consider all objections to decide the matter,” Kumar said.In a rejoinder, senior counsel Devadatt Kamat appearing for Thackeray argued that the commission itself deferred the hearing of the case as the Supreme Court was hearing his client’s stay application between July 22 till September 27, drawing the court’s attention to the orders of the commission.“This whole bogie that we have delayed falls flat. The deferments were made by the commission with respect to the proceedings before the Supreme Court,” Kamat said. He further took the court to various freezing orders of other parties where in each instance he claimed that the orders were passed after hearing the parties.“Hearing the parties is a statutory requirement which the commission could not have dispensed with,” Kamat concluded.Uddhav Thackrey and Eknath Shinde’s factions approached the ECI laying claim to the party name “Shiv Sena” and the bow and arrow symbol but the election body in its October 8 “interim order” restrained both factions from using the party name and the symbol until it decides which among the two rival factions is entitled to use them.
Former Maharashtra Chief Minister Uddhav Thackeray Monday told the Delhi High Court that the Election Commission of India’s (EC) order freezing the party’s name, Shiv Sena, and its bow and arrow election symbol is “totally perverse”.Noting that EC’s order was regarding November 3 Andheri bypoll, a single-judge bench of Justice Sanjeev Narula said the order has “run its life” and asked why should court not await EC’s final view on the issue.Appearing for Thackeray, senior counsel Devadatt Kamat submitted, “I am a political party…today my entire political activity has come to a standstill. When a quasi-judicial authority passes an order which has several consequences on my right as a party, it (EC) is duty-bound to be satisfied that a prima facie case is made out.” Kamat told the bench that unless EC is prima facie satisfied it cannot freeze the symbol. Today “I can’t use the name and symbol of my father”, he added.Senior counsel Kapil Sibal, also appearing for Thackeray, submitted that maintainability of CM Shinde’s claim on bow and arrow symbol and party name should be decided before passing a final order. Sibal said, “Question is, is the EC going to decide maintainability or not. If it is one final order, everything will becomeinfructuous…fundamental question is maintainability of the petition…” Sibal also said that an “expeditious disposal” means EC will decide in Shinde’s favour, and it has not considered Thackeray’s objections.HC observed that it will ask EC to decide the issue of allotting the symbol in a time-bound manner after hearing both factions.Appearing for Shinde, Neeraj Kishan Kaul said, “We have said that he (Shinde) wasn’t disqualified it was an internal dispute. EC gave repeated opportunities to them to file a reply. They (Thackeray faction) didn’t do so; they went to SC to seek a stay, which they were not granted.”
Former Chief Minister of Maharashtra, Uddhav Thackeray, told the Delhi High Court Monday that the Election Commission of India’s order freezing the Shiv Sena party’s name and the ‘bow and arrow’ election symbol is “totally perverse”.Appearing for Thackeray, senior counsel Devdutt Kamat said, before a single judge bench of Justice Sanjeev Narula, “I’m a political party… today my entire political activity has come to a standstill”.“When a quasi-judicial authority passes an order which has several consequences on my right as a party it is, it (ECI) is the duty bound to be satisfied that a prima facie case is made out,” Kamat said. He further submitted that unless the ECI is prima facie satisfied, it cannot freeze the symbol. “I can’t use the name and symbol of my father today,” he added.Senior counsel Kapil Sibal, also appearing for Thackeray, submitted that the maintainability of Maharashtra Chief Minister Eknath Shinde’s claim on the symbol and the party name should be decided first, before passing a final order.Sibal argued, “Question is – is the Election Commission going to decide maintainability or not? If it is one final order everything will become infructuous…fundamental question is the maintainability of the petition…”. Sibal further said that an “expeditious disposal” means that it (ECI) will decide in Shinde’s favour, adding that the commission has not considered Thackeray’s objections.The High Court however remarked that the ECI’s order was with respect to the Andheri by-elections which had been conducted on November 3. “This order has run its life,” it said, adding that why should the court not await the final view on this issue. The HC also observed that it would ask the election body to decide the issue of allotting the ‘bow and arrow’ symbol in a time-bound manner, after hearing both factions. Thackeray-led Shiv Sena won the by-election earlier this month.Senior Counsel Neeraj Kishan Kaul, appearing for Eknath Shinde, argued that Thackeray had raised these issues before the Supreme Court and the apex court heard the matter on several dates. “We have said that he (Shinde) was not disqualified, and it was only an internal dispute between the party. EC gave repeated opportunities to them to file a reply since July. They didn’t do so. They went to the Supreme Court to seek a stay which they weren’t granted.”After hearing the parties, the HC directed them to file brief note of submissions, and listed the matter for hearing on November 15.The Supreme Court in September rejected Thackeray’s prayer to stay proceedings pending before the ECI over a request by Shinde for recognition of his faction as the real Shiv Sena and the permission to use the party’s ‘bow and arrow’ election symbol.“We direct there shall be no stay on proceedings before the Election Commission. Interlocutory Application seeking stay stands dismissed,” a five-judge constitution bench, headed by Justice D Y Chandrachud, said.The Thackeray camp had approached the top court stating that while petitions arising out of the Maharashtra political crisis, fuelled by the rift in the Shiv Sena, were pending before it, the ECI “purportedly… initiated proceedings” under Para 15 of the Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order, 1968, on an application by the Shinde camp “inter alia seeking to be recognised as the ‘real Shiv Sena’ and claiming the right to use the bow-arrow election symbol” and had issued notice to Uddhav Thackeray on July 22.Uddhav Thackrey and Eknath Shinde’s factions approached the ECI laying claim to the party name “Shiv Sena” and the bow and arrow symbol but the election body in its October 8 interim order restrained both factions from using the party name and the symbol until it decides which among the two rival factions is entitled to use them.This came after Shinde and a majority of the Shiv Sena MLA’s withdrew from Thackeray’s government leading to its fall.
The Uddhav Thackeray-led Shiv Sena won the Andheri (East) Assembly bypoll on Sunday as many observers expected but an eye-catching takeaway from the election was the high share of None of the Above (NOTA) votes at nearly 15 per cent of the votes polled.The high percentage of NOTA votes — up from 2.93 per cent of the total vote share in the 2019 Assembly elections — raised the eyebrows of many, with the Maha Vikas Aghadi (MVA) alliance, of which the Uddhav faction of the Sena is a part, and political observers suspecting the use of money power. Some political analysts claimed that of the total NOTA votes, over 70 per cent was the result of a sustained behind-the-scenes campaign carried out of vendetta for not getting BJP candidate Murji Patel to bow out of the contest. Following appeals from outfits such as the Raj Thackeray-led Maharashtra Navnirman Sena (MNS) and the Nationalist Congress Party (NCP), the BJP withdrew Patel and provided the Thackeray-led Sena’s candidate Rutuja Latke an almost clear path to victory. The bypoll was necessitated by the death of Latke’s husband Ramesh Latke in May.“The NOTA voters in 2019 seem to be traditional voters who choose NOTA as a means of protest. But it seems that the remaining (NOTA) voters (this time) chose NOTA for political vendetta to mobilise voters against Latke. Three kinds of voters might have opted for NOTA. First, those who did not see any viable alternative from the contesting candidates voted NOTA as a protest. Second, the hardcore BJP and RSS supporters may have chosen NOTA since there was no BJP candidate. And third may have been the supporters and sympathisers of Murji Patel who were upset with the BJP as the party asked him to withdraw his nomination and they campaigned for NOTA,” said Sanjay Patil, a political analyst.After the results were declared, Shiv Sena alleged that voters were paid to choose NOTA and alluded to the role of “some parties” in attempting to ensure that Latke’s victory was “disgraced and dishonourable”. Hitting out at the BJP, Uddhav Thackeray said, “It is clear that there was a use of notes in the elections … there was campaigning for NOTA. Had the BJP contested the election, the party would have got the same number of votes as NOTA.”Latke also claimed that the BJP withdrew their candidate after realising that he would lose and hence the NOTA campaign was launched.“The BJP knew that they would get the same number of votes as NOTA, so they withdrew from the polls stating tradition but later campaigned for NOTA,” Latke said.The BJP refuted the allegations and claimed it had nothing to do with the high number of NOTA votes polled. Congratulating Latke, Mumbai BJP president Ashish Shelar claimed the Uddhav Sena candidate won only because of his party’s help and had the BJP contested she would have lost. “The Shiv Sena (Uddhav Balasaheb Thackeray) did not mobilise more votes. Had BJP contested the bypoll, the Shiv Sena candidate would have lost. So, Shiv the Sena (UBT) should realise that Latke’s win is with the help of BJP,” Shelar said.Murji Patel said the low turnout on polling day (November 3) — almost 1.9 lakh voters did not vote — indicated public anger with Uddhav and his party. “There is dissatisfaction and unrest among the public against Thackeray and the Sena led by him. So, almost 70 per cent of voters did not turn up for voting and almost 15 per cent chose NOTA. There is no point in blaming us if people are choosing to vote NOTA,” Patel said.Along with Latke, six other independents and candidates from small parties were in the fray but their total vote share was far less than the NOTA vote share. While these candidates managed to receive only 7,122 votes of the 86,198 votes polled, 12,721 votes chose NOTA.Sena leader and MLC Anil Parab who alerted the Election Commission (EC) and local police about alleged campaigning and distribution of money to voters to choose for NOTA in the by-poll said this was the victory of Shiv Sainiks and showed that Mumbaikars were with Uddhav Thackeray.“This is a victory of Mumbaikars, the Shiv Sena and the MVA. I had raised with the EC and the local police the issue of distribution of money by a few Opposition party workers to voters. The voters were told to choose NOTA. But no action was taken even after I provided evidence like audio clips and videos of the workers and their identities. So, I think all those votes for NOTA were the Opposition party’s votes,” Parab said.
At least 14.79 per cent of the total voters who had exercised their franchise in the Andheri (East) Assembly bypoll in Mumbai chose the None of The Above (NOTA) option, as per the data analysed on Sunday when the result was declared. In absolute numbers, 12,806 votes were polled in favour of NOTA, which stood in second space after the winning candidate, an official said. Rutuja Latke, the candidate of the Shiv Sena (Uddhav Balasaheb Thackeray) backed by NCP and Congress, on Sunday won the bypoll by bagging 66,530 votes of the total 86,570 votes polled in the November 3 byelection. Rutuja Latke polled 76.85 per cent of the total votes. In the 2019 election to the Andheri (East) constituency, Ramesh Latke of Shiv Sena polled 62,773 votes against his nearest rival Murji Patel (Independent) who had bagged 45,808 votes. The NOTA tally stood at 4,311 at that time. The byelection was necessitated due to the death of sitting MLA and Rutuja's husband Ramesh Latke in May this year. Rutuja Latke's victory was certain given that the candidate of the Bharatiya Janata Party, Murji Patel, had withdrawn at the last moment, granting a virtual walkover to Rutuja Latke. Besides Rutuja Latke, six Independent candidates were in the fray. Of them, Rajesh Tripathi got 1,571 votes, Neena Khedekar 1,531, Bala Nadar 1,515, Farhana Sayed 1,093, Manoj Nayak 900, and Milind Kamble received 624 votes. A turnout of 31.74 per cent was recorded. Queried on NOTA tally, Shiv Sena president Uddhav Thackeray hinted that the BJP's nominee would have scored as many votes had he contested the bypoll. "Had our opponents been in the poll fray, their candidate would have secured the same number of NOTA votes", he told reporters after Rutuja Latke called on him post her win. Speaking on the bypoll outcome, Maharashtra BJP president Chandrashekhar Bawankule said in Thane that the victory of Rutuja Latke was certain the day the BJP withdrew its nominee. Queried on the NOTA tally, he said, "Once withdrawn from the fray, the BJP will not indulge in activities like casting NOTA votes". He recalled the BJP withdrew from the fray after NCP president Sharad Pawar and MNS leader Raj Thackeray's appeal to grant Rutuja Latke a virtual walkover.
MUMBAI: Rutuja Latke, the candidate of the Shiv Sena (Uddhav Balasaheb Thackeray), won the byelection to Andheri (East) assembly seat decisively with 66,530 votes Her nearest rival was None of the Above (NOTA) 12,806 votes. Latke, the wife of late Shiv Sena MLA Ramesh Latke whose death prompted the bypoll secured 3,757 more votes than her husband. The turnout for voting was low at 38%. Total votes cast — 83,570. Following her victory, Latke said the high number of NOTA votes were that of the BJP. "Had the BJP contested the elections it would have secured that many votes," she said, adding, if the BJP had real sympathy they would never have put up a candidate. "They withdrew after they realised they would not win the election," she said. The counting was held in 19 rounds. Latke was leading right from the start. The six independent candidates secured votes ranging from 624 (Milind Kamble) to 1,571 (Rajesh Tripathi). Shiv Sena (UBT) chief Uddhav Thackeray said that despite the conspiracy in which the party's name and symbol were snatched, the Mashaal (the new party symbol) was lit and the Saffron flag unfurled. "This is the beginning of a fight and it has begun with a win. We had the support of the Congress, NCP, Vanchit Bahujan Aghadi (VBA), Communist Party, Sambhaji Brigade and several others. The forthcoming elections will be won similarly," he said. Hitting back, union minister Narayan Rane said the BJP had already offered its support. "We did not leave them hanging," he said. In a tweet, BJP Mumbai unit president Ashish Shelar said Latke’s victory was owing to the support of the BJP. "Congress, NCP, Communist and a dozen others backed the Shiv Sena (UBT) yet the voting did not increase nor did they get more votes. Had the BJP contested their defeat was certain," he tweeted. भाजपाच्या मदतीमुळे मा. ऋतुजा लटके यांचा अंधेरी पूर्व मध्ये विजय..ऋतुजाताईंचे अभिनंदन!!काँग्रेस,राष्ट्रवादी,भाकपडझ… https://t.co/twngwOJ9qu— Adv. Ashish Shelar - ॲड. आशिष शेलार (@ShelarAshish) 1667723878000Shiv Sena (UBT) leader Anil Parab said they had complained to the Election Commission about voters being offered money to press the NOTA button. "Yet the police did not take cognizance of our complaint. NOTA votes were obtained illegally. The elections prove Mumbaikars are with the SS (UBT),” he said, adding that while the BJP withdrew its candidate it did not support Latke.
