Premium
This is an archive article published on December 13, 2022

Party name, poll symbol freeze: Uddhav moves Delhi HC challenging dismissal of plea against EC move

Uddhav Thackeray and Eknath Shinde’s factions approached the ECI with claim on party name 'Shiv Sena' and the 'bow and arrow' symbol but the election panel in its October 8 interim order restrained both factions from using the party name and the symbol until a decision was taken.

Uddhav Thackeray's appeal states that the single judge failed to appreciate that the ECI's order is “patently illegal, without jurisdiction and unsustainable, both in law and on facts”. (File Photo)Uddhav Thackeray's appeal states that the single judge failed to appreciate that the ECI's order is “patently illegal, without jurisdiction and unsustainable, both in law and on facts”. (File Photo)
Listen to this article
Party name, poll symbol freeze: Uddhav moves Delhi HC challenging dismissal of plea against EC move
x
00:00
1x 1.5x 1.8x

Former Maharashtra CM Uddhav Thackeray has moved the Delhi High Court against the order of a single judge bench that dismissed his plea against the Election Commission of India’s decision to freeze the “Shiv Sena” party name and “bow and arrow” symbol, which he had laid claim on.

Thackeray and Eknath Shinde’s factions approached the ECI with claim on party name ‘Shiv Sena’ and the ‘bow and arrow’ symbol but the election panel in its October 8 interim order restrained both factions from using the party name and the symbol until a decision was taken.

On November 15, a single judge bench of Justice Sanjeev Narula dismissed Thackeray’s plea and further directed the ECI to decide the issue in an “expeditious manner”. The HC 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. The single judge further said that the objection on maintainability of the petition will be examined by the ECI on its own merits while reaching a final decision.

Thackeray’s appeal states that the single judge failed to appreciate that the ECI’s order is “patently illegal, without jurisdiction and unsustainable, both in law and on facts”.

The appeal further states that the issue of maintainability being a preliminary issue ought to have been decided at the preliminary stage, and the single judge could not have directed ECI to decide the objection on non-maintainability of the petition along with the main petition, which would render a final decision.

The appeal further states that the single judge failed to appreciate that the question of Shinde’s disqualification is still pending before the Supreme Court and ECI’s action is premised on an underlying assumption that the apex court will decide in Shinde’s favour.

The single judge had also observed that the ECI passed the freezing order after taking note of the urgency with respect to allotment of symbol as the by-election schedule had been announced. The judge further said that after Thackeray repeatedly sought time before the ECI for furnishing necessary documents, he cannot now allege violation of principles of natural justice and criticise the poll panel.

Story continues below this ad

To counter this, the appeal states that the requests for time were made in view of the fact that the ECI’s counsel had agreed for extension of time before the Supreme Court and the apex court had granted liberty to Thackeray to seek time.

The appeal is likely to be listed on December 15.

Stay updated with the latest - Click here to follow us on Instagram

Latest Comment
Post Comment
Read Comments
Advertisement
Loading Taboola...
Advertisement