Fearing fresh split, Sena (UBT) urges Speaker Om Birla to deny recognition to rebel MPs

Amid reports of a possible rebellion by a section of its Lok Sabha MPs, the Uddhav Thackeray-led Shiv Sena (UBT) has written to Speaker Om Birla, urging him not to recognise any breakaway faction of the party in Parliament, arguing that the Constitution no longer provides legal recognition to a “split” in a political party.

The move is being seen as a pre-emptive attempt by the Shiv Sena (UBT) to block any repeat of the 2022 Eknath Shinde-style rebellion before rebel MPs formally approach the Speaker seeking recognition in the House. This is at a time when rebel MPs are in Delhi and likely to meet the speaker.

In a detailed letter sent on behalf of the party, Sena (UBT) parliamentary party leader Arvind Sawant said reports had emerged that certain MPs elected on the party’s symbol were either planning to approach, or had already approached, the Speaker seeking recognition as a separate group or merger with another political party in Lok Sabha.

Referring to these reports, Sawant said any such move would have no constitutional backing. “The Shiv Sena (Uddhav Balasaheb Thackeray) is one political party and remains so in the eyes of law,” he said in the letter.

The development comes amid growing political speculation over attempts to engineer another crack in the Sena (UBT), nearly four years after Shinde walked out with MLAs in June 2022, triggering the split in the undivided Shiv Sena and eventually leading to the Election Commission recognising the Shinde faction as the official Shiv Sena.

Numbers alone don’t matter

Sawant argued that, after the 91st Constitutional Amendment in 2003, the anti-defection law no longer recognises a split in a political party, removing protections that earlier existed for legislators who break away from their original party. “The constitutional recognition formerly accorded to a split no longer exists,” he said.

The Sena (UBT) leader also argued that MPs elected on a party symbol derive their authority from the parent political party and cannot independently claim legitimacy merely by forming a separate legislature group.

Story continues below this ad

Citing the Supreme Court’s Constitution Bench ruling in the 2023 Maharashtra political crisis, Sawant said the court had clearly upheld the primacy of the political party over the legislature wing.

“The judgment unequivocally affirms the primacy of the political party over the legislature party. The legislature party does not possess an independent source of authority divorced from the political party,” he added.

In effect, Sawant argued that MPs cannot independently claim authority separate from their parent organisation merely because of their numbers in Parliament.

Sawant also rejected any interpretation that a breakaway supported by two-thirds of MPs can automatically seek protection under anti-defection provisions.

Story continues below this ad

“Public reports appear to proceed on the erroneous assumption that the numerical requirement alone is sufficient. That is contrary to the Constitution and its interpretation by the Supreme Court,” the letter stated.

Explaining the legal position, Sawant said in the letter that an exemption under the Tenth Schedule is available only when the original political party itself merges with another political party and not merely when legislators decide to split on their own.

“Paragraph 4 requires the cumulative satisfaction of two distinct conditions: first, a merger of the original political party; and second, the support of not less than two-thirds of the members of the legislature party concerned,” the letter said.

‘May attract consequences’

The Sena (UBT) MP specifically urged the Speaker not to entertain any request made by rebel MPs and ensure that “no separate recognition, status, privilege or facility be accorded to any purported faction or breakaway group claiming to represent the party.”

Story continues below this ad

He also warned that any MPs attempting to function independently of the authorised party leadership without a formal merger of the original political party could face disqualification proceedings under the anti-defection law.

“In the absence of such a merger, conduct whereby members seek to project themselves as a separate political formation… may attract the consequences prescribed under Paragraph 2 of the Tenth Schedule,” it said.

The party further indicated that it was prepared to initiate legal proceedings if any MP acted contrary to the party’s authorised leadership.

“The party further reserves all rights available to it in law, including the right to invoke the provisions of the Tenth Schedule and pursue such remedies as may be necessary,” the letter added.