© The Indian Express Pvt Ltd
Former Maharashtra Chief Minister Uddhav Thackeray and then Governor Bhagat Singh Koshyari
Betrayed by his own party members, former Maharashtra Chief Minister Uddhav Thackeray last year decided to step down rather than face a floor test. But almost a year on, that decision seems to come back to haunt the Shiv Sena (Uddhav Balasaheb Thackeray) leader as the Supreme Court on Thursday said that then Governor Bhagat Singh Koshyari’s decision to ask Thackeray to face a floor test was “not justified”. But the court added, “The status quo ante cannot be restored as Uddhav Thackeray did not face the floor test and resigned.”
That Uddhav acted in haste is something that leaders of his allies Congress and Nationalist Congres Party (NCP) had been saying periodically over the past year. This lack of political judgment, according to insiders in these parties, is a liability and why they are reluctant to accord him a higher position in the alliance.
NCP president Sharad Pawar has said that Thackeray “should have faced the trust vote” and this episode also found mention in his autobiography that was recently released. “Thackeray did not discuss his resignation with alliance partners. They had no idea about his decision to step down.” The NCP leader went on to say that he and others in the government also sensed the lack of political deftness in Thackeray, something which a CM needs. Noting that Thackeray’s health became a constraint for him, the NCP leader noted that a CM needs “political acumen” and must remain well-informed about political goings-on and “we all felt that these things were lacking”. He attributed it to Thackeray’s inexperience.
Senior Congress leader and former CM Prithviraj Chavan who played an equally significant role in convincing Sonia Gandhi to agree to the alliance with Thackeray and form MVA has also admitted that the resignation was a blunder.
But a strategist who agreed with Thackeray’s decision to step down said, “We did not want Thackeray to face the embarrassment of facing the defeat on the floor of the House. The result of the trust vote was a foregone conclusion. It would have been personally a huge humiliation for Thackeray to see his own sainiks rebel and defeat him.”
The objective, according to some Sena insiders, was that resigning after a public address was part of a plan to earn public sympathy. Even if it was the aim, the strategy did not pay dividends. There are also examples from contemporary history that show facing no-confidence motions and failing to win them often prove to be politically significant moves in the long term. One such leader who survived defeats in two no-trust votes was Atal Bihari Vajpayee of the BJP. His coalition governments fell twice, once in 1996 after 13 days and then in 1998 after 13 months. The second loss was by just one vote.
For many in the BJP, Thackeray’s biggest political blunder was to walk away from the alliance the two parties had over seat sharing and a tussle over the CM’s chair. Senior BJP leader and Cabinet Minister Sudhir Mungantiwar said, “I always worked to keep the BJP and the undivided Shiv Sena together. But then Thackeray betrayed us. He had other plans and the BJP was not in his consideration.”
A senior BJP functionary said, “Thackeray’s always believe they are above others. That is their style. But then it worked with Bal Thackeray who was a towering leader. His politics was not based on petty power calculations. He himself never wanted to be CM or PM. So, he earned a lot of respect both inside and outside party.”