Ajit's Time & His Clock: Like Uddhav, Sharad Pawar Loses To 'NCP Constitution'

As Ajit Pawar gets NCP name and clock symbol, Sharad Pawar declares a new name for his faction.

The Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) belongs to Ajit Pawar, Sharad Pawar's decisions were illegal — that was the gist of the Election Commission's 140-page verdict in the 'real NCP' dispute between Ajit and Sharad Pawar that lasted over seven months after the party split in June last year.

The verdict, that drew heavily from the Shiv Sena split case of the EC, gave the Ajit Pawar's faction, now the 'real NCP', much to rejoice. Even as the deputy chief minister "humbly" accepted it, NCP leader Dhananjay Munde called 'Ajit Pawar's time and Ajit Pawar's clock' as the Maharashtra Deputy CM now gets both the party name and clock symbol.

One peculiarity, though, was the fact that five MLAs and one Lok Sabha MP from Maharashtra gave affidavits in favour of both factions to the EC.

Sharad Pawar's faction will now be recognised by a new name — 'Nationalist Congress Party Sharadchandra Pawar'.

While there are clear parallels with the verdict in the Shiv Sena split, just like the Uddhav Thackeray, Sharad Pawar's case boiled down to one key aspect — the party constitution.

Why the Election Commission Ruled in Ajit's Favour

The verdict of the Election Commission can be summarised broadly as following:

• The EC said that Ajit Pawar had submitted an affidavit on 30 June 2023 apprising it of a split in the party. This was two days before he took oath as the deputy CM on 2 July 2023. (The said affidavit was not public knowledge until 2 July.)

• The Ajit Pawar faction could conclusively prove the maximum support of MLAs, MPs, and party office-bearers, as per the organisational structure laid down by the party's constitution.

• While choosing Sharad Pawar as the party president in September 2022, the guidelines laid down in the party's constitution were not duly followed, hence his appointment was illegal, the EC said.

• The Sharad Pawar faction could not establish proof of support of party leaders while he was chosen the president.

• Since Sharad Pawar's appointment as party president was illegal, his appointment of Jayant Patil as Maharashtra NCP chief, too, was illegal. Moreover, Patil had exceeded his tenure of Maharashtra NCP chief, as mandated by the party constitution, and continued on the post without fresh elections.

• On 10 June 2023, Sharad Pawar appointed Supriya Sule and Praful Patel as 'Working Presidents' of the NCP but no such post exists in the party constitution and hence it nullifies those appointments.

• As the party constitution mandates, office-bearers were not appointed in several states. As a result, the submissions of office bearers only from Maharashtra were taken into consideration by the EC.

• From the total MLAs, MPs, and MLCs of the NCP, those who gave affidavits of support for either sides are as follows:

In its conclusive comments, the EC cautioned parties to follow intra party procedures as per the party constitution.

"A majority of symbol dispute cases which come before the Commission under Paragraph 15 of the Symbols Order show that political parties are either not holding regular organizational elections, or not holding them as per Party Constitution, or have amended their Constitution in such a manner that "elections" have turned into "appointments". Such actions on the part of the political parties not only affect the Commission's scope in applying the test of Party Constitution in adjudicating the dispute cases but also renders ineffective the application of test of majority in the organizational wing of the Party," the EC said.

'Just Like Shiv Sena'

Leaders of Sharad Pawar's faction did not shy away from drawing parallels with "what happened to Uddhav Thackeray."

"We were expecting this verdict. What was done to the Shiv Sena has been done to us. Sharad Pawar has created new worlds from nothing in the past. He formed the Nationalist Congress Party at the age of 30. Now, we will again form a party. We will move the Supreme Court. The entire country knows that the NCP belongs to Sharad Pawar. But some invisible forces took away the party from us," Sharad Pawar's daughter and MP Supriya Sule told the media after the verdict came out.

Sharad Pawar's grandnephew and MLA Rohit Pawar took to X to say: "A splinter group can take an unconstitutional decision to hijack the party for selfish gains by misusing the unbridled power of forces at the Centre."

Shiv Sena (UBT) national spokesperson Sanjay Raut echoed Sule's views.

"What happened to Shiv Sena happened to Sharad Pawar. The founders of the party were sitting before the Election Commission but they handed over the party to someone else. This is what you call the 'Modi guarantee'," Raut said, adding that "Election Commission is not the Election Commission of India but the Election Commission of Modi-Shah."

Speaker's Verdict May Not be Different

Like the Sena, the Sharad Pawar faction, too, will move the Supreme Court. And just like the Sena, the Maharashtra Legislative Assembly Speaker is yet to decide on the disqualification petitions that Sharad Pawar's faction had moved against 9 MLAs, including Ajit Pawar.

Speaking of the technicalities of the verdict, NCP leader Jitendra Awhad raised objections over the EC's observation that there was a conflict brewing in the party since 2019.

"The EC said that since Ajit Pawar split in 2019, there have been differences in the party. After what happened in 2019 (when Ajit Pawar took oath with Devendra Fadnavis) his uncle (Sharad Pawar) was big-hearted, so he took him back and made him the Deputy Chief Minister with his blessings. So, where were the differences? Ajit Pawar went back on his knees asking for forgiveness, Sharad Pawar had a big heart to forgive him. He was forgiven, he was made the deputy CM and the Leader of Opposition. So, what exactly is the EC referring to from 2019?” Awhad asked.

Awhad further questioned the meeting of Ajit Pawar and his MLAs that took place on 30 January 2023 before they submitted an affidavit to the EC.

"Why is the meeting of 30 June (2023) being hidden? You cannot sit in a room and decide that the party is ours, who the president will be, and so on. Was there a notice (to party members) sent? Where is its copy? Shouldn't something be done according to the party constitution? Their choice of leaders has been ruled illegal, so is ours (by the EC). So, on what basis did they give the decision?" Awhad asked.

All eyes are now on Speaker Rahul Narwekar, who also decided the fate of the Shiv Sena a few weeks ago. While his verdict on the disqualification of 9 NCP MLAs was expected by 31 January, it may now be given out only by next week.

Sule, however, said that Narwekar's verdict, too, won't be different.

"What verdict will he give after the EC ruling? I don't need to spell that out. We will get the same verdict as the Shiv Sena got," Sule said.

The verdict may have settled any speculations of the two factions coming together anytime soon. However, it puts Sharad Pawar in the same boat as Uddhav Thackeray - to wait for the people's verdict in the elections.