Eknath Shinde and Uddhav Thackeray have a very close relationship and have been friends for many years. They have been allies in the Maharashtra state government for over a decade, with Shinde serving as Minister for Transport and Public Works and Thackeray as Chief Minister.
The two leaders have worked together to ensure the development of Maharashtra, from infrastructure projects to social reform. Thackeray is known to call Shinde his elder brother, and their bond is said to be such that it is almost familial.
It is clear that the two share a strong relationship, and are devoted to making Maharashtra a better place for everyone. The election commission of India ordered on Friday that the party name Shiv Sena and the party symbol bow and arrow will be retained by the Eknath Shinde.
Uddhav Thackeray and Eknath Shinde were claiming the party name and symbol since Eknath Shinde revolted against the Uddhav Thackeray led government. Last week the election commission recognised the Eknath Shinde party name and the bow and arrow symbol. The poll body said the current constitution of Shiv Sena is un
democratic.
The Supreme Court listed the petition of the former Maharashtra Chief Minister, Uddhav Thackeray, challenging the decision of the Election Commission of India to give party name and symbol to Eknath Shinde. Senior advocate A.M. Singhvi said the turn of events following the EC order is leading to a situation.
Mr Shinde’s counsel, senior advocate Neeraj Kishan kaul, appearing on caveat, said Mr Thakre had already raised these issues twice in the High court. The Supreme Court has agreed to hear former Maharashtra Chief Minister Uddhav Thackeray’s plea against the Election Commissions (EC) order which allotted the Shivsena.
Chief Justice Chandrachud said the case would be listed on February 22 after the Constitution Bench hearing in the Shinde-Thackeray dispute . This will be the first time the Supreme Court will hear the Thackeray faction’s petition in the case, and the outcome of the hearing will be closely watched.
In his appeal, Mr Thackeray, also represented by advocate Amit Anand Tiwari, said the election commission was unfair and biased. It had failed in its duty as a neutral arbiter of dispute under the election symbol reservation and allotment order of 1968.
The petition said that legislative majority alone is not a safe guide to determine who holds the majority for the purpose of arbitrating a petition under paragraph 15 of the symbol order.
