In advance of Team Uddhav’s court date, Sanjay Raut condemns “Delhi Scriptwriters.”
The months-long dispute over the Sena name and symbol was finally resolved on Friday in favour of the side headed by Chief Minister Eknath Shinde by the Election Commission.
On the eve of a key Supreme Court hearing on the Sena split, Sanjay Raut, leader of the Uddhav Thackeray group, told NDTV today that the Supreme Court will decide who receives the Shiv Sena name and symbol.
Additionally, Mr. Raut maintained by his assertion that a 2000 crore agreement was made to “purchase” the Sena name and party emblem. He asserted that the entire scheme was conceived to win the Brihanmumbai Corporation, the richest local body in the nation, in the next municipal elections.
The months-long dispute over the Sena name and symbol was abruptly resolved on Friday by the Election Commission in favour of the side headed by Chief Minister Eknath Shinde. Mr. Thackeray appealed the ruling to the Supreme Court and asked for a prompt hearing. Abhishek Manu Singhvi, a senior attorney, was nonetheless instructed by the court to “come tomorrow through regular process.”
According to Mr. Raut, the supreme court’s decision-making authority is definitive. In an interview with NDTV, Mr. Raut stated, “The Supreme Court would make the decision on this and the SC had stated that Election Commission should not take a judgement since the subject is sub judice.”
The months-long dispute over the Sena name and symbol was abruptly resolved on Friday by the Election Commission in favour of the side headed by Chief Minister Eknath Shinde. Mr. Thackeray appealed the ruling to the Supreme Court and asked for a prompt hearing. Abhishek Manu Singhvi, a senior attorney, was nonetheless instructed by the court to “come tomorrow through regular process.”
According to Mr. Raut, the supreme court’s decision-making authority is definitive. In an exclusive interview with NDTV, Mr. Raut stated, “The Supreme Court would make the decision on this and the SC had stated that Election Commission should not take a judgement since the subject is sub judice.”
The panel had postponed hearing a request on Friday to have the 2016 Nabam Rebia ruling reviewed and sent to a seven-judge bench. The ruling relates to the authority of assembly speakers to rule on disqualification arguments. At that time, the court had ruled that if a prior notice seeking his removal is now before the House, the assembly speaker cannot move further with a plea for the disqualification of MLAs.
The renegade MLAs were able to stay in the assembly thanks to the judgement, which benefited the faction commanded by Mr. Shinde. As a notification from the Shinde group for the removal of Deputy Speaker Narhari Sitaram Zirwal, an NCP politician, was still pending in the House, the Uddhav Thackeray side sought their disqualification.