Discuss the powers of the Election Commission of India in adjudicating disputes over party symbols and leadership. Illustrate with recent examples.

When a recognised party splits, the question of who is the "real" party is settled not by courts in the first instance but by the Election Commission of India (ECI), acting as a quasi-judicial authority under Paragraph 15 of the Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order, 1968 [1] — a subordinate order traceable to the ECI's superintendence of elections under Article 324.

Source and scope of the power

• Para 15 empowers the ECI to decide rival claims by factions of a recognised party to its name and reserved symbol, and its decision binds all factions [1].
• Registration of parties under Section 29A, RP Act, 1951 and symbol allotment give the ECI continuing regulatory control over party identity — the symbol, not the leader, is what the voter marks.
• Interim powers include freezing the symbol and allotting temporary symbols to both groups pending final adjudication [3].

Criteria applied — the "test of majority"

• In Sadiq Ali v. ECI (1971), arising from the Congress split, the Supreme Court upheld the ECI's test of majority support across the organisational and legislative wings, read with the party constitution and aims [2].
• Applied in the Shiv Sena order of 17 February 2023 (Dispute Case No. 1 of 2022), where the ECI recognised the Shinde faction, citing majority legislative support and an undemocratic party constitution with unelected office-bearers [3].
• The pending Trinamool Congress dispute (2026) follows the same route: the ECI has sought replies from the Mamata Banerjee and Ritabrata Banerjee factions on organisational claims and authorised signatories, with a symbol freeze possible before the bypolls [4].

Concerns

• Over-reliance on legislative numbers risks rewarding defection and sidelining organisational continuity, as argued by the Thackeray faction [3].
• Weak statutory mandate for internal party elections leaves the ECI adjudicating on self-declared claims.

The ECI's Para 15 jurisdiction is thus indispensable but evidence-thin. Codifying the majority test in statute, mandating audited intra-party elections, and time-bound reasoned orders would strengthen both electoral certainty and intra-party democracy — securing the free and fair elections Article 324 envisages.