25 January,2024 06:58 PM IST | Mumbai | mid-day online correspondent
Pic: PTI File
Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) founder Sharad Pawar was on Thursday present at the Maharashtra Vidhan Bhavan for the hearing regarding disqualification petitions linked to the party's split in July 2023.
The NCP split happened when Ajit Pawar and eight MLAs joined the Ekanth Shinde government.
The former Union minister participated in the proceedings, presided over by Assembly Speaker Rahul Narwekar, for an hour, newswire PTI reported quoting sources. Lok Sabha MP Sunil Tatkare represented the Ajit Pawar faction and underwent cross-examination by lawyers from the Sharad Pawar faction during the hearing on NCP Split.
Also read: Maharashtra: MVA invites Prakash Ambedkar's Vanchit Bahujan Aghadi for seat-sharing talks
Pertinently, the Ajit Pawar faction contends that there was no actual split in the party and has raised concerns about the internal election process preceding the events in July. Both factions have submitted cross-petitions to the speaker, urging the disqualification of each other's MLAs.
The Supreme Court has set January 31 deadline for the speaker's verdict in the NCP disqualification case.
Background
On July 3, 2023, Ajit Pawar, the leader of the NCP, was sworn in as the deputy chief minister of Maharashtra, aligning himself with the existing coalition government of Shiv Sena (Shinde faction) and the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).
Shortly thereafter, on July 5, he filed a petition with the ECI, asserting his claim to the 'symbol' and 'name' of the NCP. He maintained the support of 40 members from Parliament, legislative assembly, and legislative council, citing a resolution passed on June 30, 2023, appointing him as the president of the NCP.
Also read: Ajit Pawar faction questions NCP's internal election process at speaker's hearing
Initially, Sharad Pawar, the president of the NCP, played down rumors of a party split. In his initial response, he contended that there was no evidence supporting a division within the NCP. He also argued that Ajit Pawar's petition should be dismissed as 'mala fide' and 'premature,' emphasizing that Ajit Pawar had not raised any grievances against him or utilized internal party remedies.
The reluctance of the Ajit Pawar faction to submit to the ECI's jurisdiction stems from past ECI decisions on similar intra-party disputes, as these decisions determine the 'real' political party. (With inputs from agencies)
