Eknath Shinde faction argues in Supreme Court ‘legislative majority’ still a factor to decide ‘real’ Shiv Sena

Maharashtra’s political landscape has once again become the focal point of a high-stakes legal battle as the Shinde faction of the Shiv Sena continues its fight in the Supreme Court to establish itself as the legitimate representative of the party. On September 2, 2026, senior advocate Neeraj Kishan Kaul, representing the Shinde faction, argued before a three-judge bench led by Chief Justice Surya Kant that the “legislative majority test” should remain a relevant criterion in determining which faction of the Shiv Sena holds greater authority. This assertion comes amid ongoing disputes over the legitimacy of the party’s internal divisions following a dramatic split in 2023. The dispute traces back to the defection of 40 out of 55 Shiv Sena legislators, including Maharashtra Chief Minister Eknath Shinde, who broke away from the leadership of Uddhav Thackeray. This rebellion led to the collapse of the Thackeray government and the formation of a new administration under Shinde’s leadership, supported by the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). The Election Commission subsequently recognized the Shinde faction as the “real Shiv Sena,” granting it the iconic bow-and-arrow symbol used by the party. This recognition sparked controversy, particularly among Thackeray’s supporters, who argue that the move undermined the party’s democratic processes. In response to this, senior advocate Kapil Sibal, representing Thackeray, asserted during earlier hearings that a split within a legislative party does not necessarily equate to a split within the political party itself. He challenged the legality of the Election Commission’s decision, arguing that the allocation of symbols to the Shinde faction was an unlawful act. The Supreme Court is currently reviewing petitions filed in 2024 by the Thackeray faction challenging both the allocation of the symbol and the February 2023 order recognizing the Shinde faction as the original Shiv Sena. Kishan Kaul emphasized that the Supreme Court had not dismissed the legislative majority test in a 2023 Constitution Bench ruling involving the Subhash Desai case. He pointed to the broader implications of the court’s stance, noting that the Shinde faction’s separation was driven by deep-seated ideological differences, particularly regarding Thackeray’s decision to align with the Maha Vikas Aghadi alliance, which includes parties considered ideologically incompatible with the Shiv Sena’s core values. The legal proceedings reflect a deeper political struggle, with each faction claiming legitimacy based on different interpretations of party governance. The Shinde faction contends that its numerical strength in the legislature justifies its claim to represent the party, while the Thackeray faction argues that such a determination must consider the will of the entire membership and not merely the actions of a subset of legislators. Legal experts suggest that the outcome of these proceedings could set a precedent for how political parties manage internal splits and determine their official representatives. The court’s decision may influence future cases involving similar disputes, potentially reshaping the rules governing party structure and representation in Indian politics. As the hearing progresses, all eyes remain on the judiciary’s interpretation of the legislative majority test and its application to the Shiv Sena’s internal conflict. The resolution of this case could mark a pivotal moment in the evolving dynamics of India’s political landscape.