Representing the Thackeray faction, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal argued that there was no need to refer the issues to a Constitution Bench.
The CJI then mooted,
“Suppose there are two groups saying we are the real political party. General members of the political party cannot claim to recognise who is the original political party.”
To this, Sibal said,
“They [Shinde faction] say they have the support of 40 out of 50 party members and thus they say they are real Shiv Sena. Now if the 40 are disqualified, what lies in this? If Election Commission decides one way or the other, what happens to this defection?”
Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi added,
“Till this Court decides, how can EC decide this issue so that later they say that these proceedings are infructuous?”
Appearing for the Election Commission, Senior Advocate Arvind Datar then said,
“When they [rebel MLAs] become disqualified, they are disqualified from the House but they are not disqualified from the party. Article 324 is clear and judgments are there in this case. This is not a political issue. Tenth Schedule cannot interdict this. I can only decide who can have the symbol after the evidence is adduced.”
The Court then asked the EC to allow the Thackeray faction to submit an affidavit, and in the mean time, to not decide who gets the symbol or take precipitative action.
Source: Barandbench
