Shiv Sena (UBT) Moves Supreme Court Against Lok Sabha Speaker’s Approval of Merger of Six MPs with Shinde Faction
In a fresh chapter of the prolonged political and legal battle within the Shiv Sena, the Shiv Sena (Uddhav Balasaheb Thackeray) faction has approached the Supreme Court challenging the Lok Sabha Speaker’s decision approving the merger of six of its Members of Parliament with the Eknath Shinde-led Shiv Sena. The petition was filed shortly after Speaker Om Birla formally recognised the merger, a move that significantly altered the party’s strength in the Lok Sabha.
The Uddhav Thackeray-led faction has contended that the Speaker’s decision violates the provisions of the Tenth Schedule (Anti-Defection Law). According to the petition, legislators cannot independently engineer a merger unless the original political party itself has merged with another party. The plea argues that no such merger of the parent political party ever took place and, therefore, the recognition granted to the six MPs is unconstitutional.
Senior Advocate Devadatt Kamat, appearing for Shiv Sena (UBT), mentioned the matter before the Supreme Court, seeking urgent intervention against the Speaker’s order. The Bench, headed by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, took note of the submission and indicated that the Court would examine the matter, remarking, “We will see,” while considering the request for an early hearing.
The dispute stems from the Speaker’s approval granted during the Monsoon Session, whereby six MPs elected on the Shiv Sena (UBT) ticket were recognised as having merged with the Shinde-led Shiv Sena. Following the approval, the parliamentary strength of the Thackeray faction in the Lok Sabha was reduced to just three members, while the Shinde faction further consolidated its position within the ruling National Democratic Alliance (NDA).
The legal challenge is expected to revisit important constitutional questions concerning the scope of the Speaker’s powers under the Anti-Defection Law. The Supreme Court may have to determine whether a legislative party can claim protection under the merger provisions without a corresponding merger of the original political party, an issue that has repeatedly surfaced since the 2022 split in the Shiv Sena.
The outcome of the case could have significant consequences not only for the parliamentary status of the six MPs but also for the interpretation of merger provisions under the Tenth Schedule. A ruling by the apex court is likely to influence future disputes involving party splits, defections and the constitutional authority of legislative Speakers in recognising mergers.
