During recent hearing at Election Commission significant dispute within Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) was discussed. The disagreement revolved around whether Sharad Pawar the party’s founding member, or his nephew, Ajit Pawar, should be recognized as legitimate leader of the NCP. The meeting, which took place in New Delhi, involved lawyers representing both factions presenting their arguments.
Clash of Arguments at Election Commission
Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, who represented Sharad Pawar, expressed astonishment at the logic presented by Ajit Pawar’s faction. Singhvi pointed out that the other side’s reasoning seemed strange and lacked legal basis. He highlighted that fundamental issue was whether there was genuine dispute within the party, which needed to be determined first. Despite this Election Commission chose not to make decision at this stage.
Unconventional Leadership Claims
Ajit Pawar’s faction argued that they did not want to undergo the organizational test, a standard method to determine party leadership. Instead, they proposed an unconventional approach, suggesting the counting of MPs, MLAs, and even votes of these representatives. Ajit Pawar claimed the support of 42 MLAs, six MLCs, and 2 MPs from Maharashtra, emphasizing his widespread backing within the party.
Sharad Pawar, who attended the hearing, faced disparaging remarks from Ajit Pawar’s lawyer, who accused him of not upholding democratic values within the party. Despite these challenges, Sharad Pawar remained composed.
Sharad Pawar’s Steadfastness
Before the Election Commission hearing, Sharad Pawar held discussions with Congress leaders Mallikarjun Kharge and Rahul Gandhi, indicating efforts to gather support and strategize in response to the ongoing crisis within the NCP.
This incident underscores internal rift within the NCP, with both factions vehemently asserting their claims to the party’s leadership. The Election Commission’s eventual decision will have significant implications for the future direction of the party as well as for political landscape in Maharashtra.
