On Wednesday, the Election Commission of India's decision to recognise the Eknath Shinde group as the official Shiv Sena was challenged in a plea filed by Uddhav Thackeray. 

DY Chandrachud, Chief Justice of India, Justice PS Narasimha, and Justice JB Pardiwala made up the three-judge panel that declined to stay the ECI order at this time. 

However, in accordance with paragraph 133(IV) of the ECI ruling, the court allowed the Uddhav group to continue using the name "Shiv Sena (Uddhav Balasaheb Thackeray)" and the symbol "flaming torch" while the matter was pending. In light of the bye-elections in the Maharashtra Assembly slated on February 26, the ECI had approved that temporary arrangement.

Also, the attorneys for the Shinde group verbally agreed that they would refrain from pursuing disqualification procedures against the Uddhav group as a preemptive measure. The commitment was left off of the order.

"This order does not contain anything regarding bank accounts or properties. ECI was deciding the symbol order. Something which is a part of the order we can certainly look upon. This does not form part of the order. ECI order is confined to the allotment of the symbol. Now they have succeeded before the EC. We cannot pass an order which has the effect of staying it without hearing them. We are entertaining the SLP. We can't stay the order at this stage.They've succeeded before the ECI", said CJI Chandrachud. 

CJI said in response to Sibal's worries that the Shinde group might seize the properties in light of an EC order, "That is independent of the ECI order. Ultimately there is a contractual relationship within a political party. Any further action, which is not based on the EC order, you have to exhaust other remedies available in law".

The bench declined to make any decisions in that regard, stating that it could only take into account matters covered by the ECI's order. 

Senior Attorney Devadatt Kamat, who was also representing the Uddhav group, asked that the ECI prolong the temporary agreement. According to him, the ECI's temporary plan (which included assigning a "flaming torch" symbol) was only in place for the bye-elections, which would end on February 26. 

The Shinde group made this proposal with no objections. Mahesh Jethmalani, a senior attorney for the Shinde side, informed the bench that the Uddhav group will not be running in the bye-elections anyway.

"That arrangement should continue till your lordships are hearing the matter. My political activity will come to standstill otherwise", Kamat pleaded. 

Uddhav claims in the petition that the ECI was "biassed and unfair," failed to uphold its constitutional standing, and failed to fulfil its obligations as a fair and impartial arbiter of disputes. 

The Eknath Shinde group was recognised by the Election Commission of India (ECI) as the official "Shiv Sena" on February 17th, allowing them to utilise the official "Bow & Arrow" symbol and "Shiv Sena" moniker. For the impending by-elections in the Maharashtra legislature, the Uddhav Thackeray faction was granted permission to use the name "Shiv Sena (Uddhav Balasaheb Thackeray)" and the "flaming torch" symbol. In order to reach its verdict, the ECI claimed to have used the criteria outlined in the Supreme Court's ruling in Sadiq Ali v. Election Commission of India from 1971.

Case Title: Uddhav Thackeray v. Eknathrao Sambhaji Shinde And Anr.
Citation: SLP(C) No. 3997/2023