Supreme Court asks ECI for timeframe to decide on Trinamool Congress name, symbol

The Supreme Court on Monday impressed upon the Election Commission of India (ECI) to expedite its decision on the dispute over the All India Trinamool Congress (TMC) name and its flowers & grass symbol.

A Bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana was hearing a petition filed by former West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee challenging the ECI's interim decision to freeze the TMC name and its election symbol.

The Court took note of Banerjee's allegations of delay in adjudication of the dispute by ECI and asked for a reasonable time for final decision in the matter.

"For how much time do you expect? Give us a reasonable timeframe in which the parties are given a fair opportunity to lead their evidence, but the matter is not prolonged and you also get sufficient time to apply your mind. Something realistic," CJI Kant asked the ECI.

The matter will be heard next on September 28.

The dispute arose after rival factions led by Mamata Banerjee and West Bengal Leader of Opposition Ritabrata Banerjee staked claim to the Trinamool Congress name, symbol and organisational control. The Election Commission passed the interim order on September 17.

The ECI's interim arrangement prevents both factions from using the All India Trinamool Congress name and symbol for the upcoming West Bengal Assembly by-elections.

The Mamata Banerjee-led faction has instead been allotted the name Mamata All India Trinamool Congress and the football player symbol. The rival faction has been allotted the name Democratic Trinamool Congress and the envelope symbol.

The arrangement assumes significance in view of the Assembly by-elections to Nandigram and Rejinagar constituencies scheduled for October 6.

The dispute over control of the party had reached the Election Commission after the Ritabrata Banerjee faction asserted that the existing organisational structure had ceased to be valid. The Mamata Banerjee camp contested this position and maintained that its organisational structure continues to be valid.

Today, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Mamata Banerjee, said that he cannot ask for a stay on the by-elections. Instead, he asked the Court to direct the ECI to start hearing the matter on a day-to-day basis for an expeditious decision.

However, Sibal also asked the Court to decide whether the ECI can keep a dispute pending for months and then pass an order just ahead of the elections.

Sibal added that if the top court upholds the ECI decision, such action will be repeated in the middle of every future election.

"There will be other elections. Calcutta Municipal Corporation election. You cannot allow a Commission to do this. You pass a direction. I don't mind, but it will not be followed. This order still remains. In another election, in another State, he will still pass an order. You must give me a remedy. You want to pass an order against me, you can't give me a fait accompli," he said.

Sibal highlighted that Banerjee's party had filed a response with the ECI on July 2, but the ECI continued to give the other side more time till it got recognition from the Speaker of West Bengal Legislative Assembly.

"How is this possible in law? You decide one way or the other. The same order could have been passed in July. I could have had a remedy. I could have come to this Court. The order may be illegal, the order may be wrong, or the order may be right. But you can't pass an interim order like this. I am not saying he can't pass it. I am saying do it before you announce the election," he said.

Justice Bagchi, while acknowledging the concern, said that the Court will have to work out a solution.

Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi, representing the opposite camp, said that they are ready to cooperate with the proceedings before the ECI.

"We will cooperate because we want the symbol. Evidence has to be led, of course. I have had experience of these kinds of orders before the Commission," he said.

Senior Advocate Neeraj Kishan Kaul, representing the ECI, said that any reasonable time may be given by the Court. 

“For the health of democracy, we have no difficulty with an expeditious decision because we know where we stand in the matter. But to say do it in ten days or twenty days may be unreasonable,” he added.

Kaul argued that the ECI has the power to pass any interim orders during the pendency of a dispute.

“There are judgments of this Court saying that the Election Commission has plenitude of powers, not only under paragraph 15 but under paragraph 18. It can pass any appropriate interim direction while the issue is resolved,” he said.

[Read Live Coverage]