Can MVA win 4 seats: experts say it’s possible

Mumbai: The ruling Maharashtra Vikas Aghadi (MVA) coalition parties found themselves in another battle on Friday after the opposition Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) raised complaints against the polling conduct of three MVA party legislators with the Election Commission of India (ECI) soon after the Rajya Sabha elections drew to a close on Friday evening.

MVA had calculated their numbers based on 42 first-preference votes for their four candidates. To achieve this, they required 168 votes — which they said they had. The required number of first-preference votes for a candidate to win in Friday’s polls is 41.

“We are in touch with those coordinating with the ECI, which is currently reviewing the objections raised by both sides. The voting quota was 42. There would be no impact on the verdict; MVA will win all four seats,” a senior Sena functionary said late on Friday.

Earlier on Friday, however, things weren’t so clear.

A delegation of senior BJP leaders led by Union minister Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi met ECI officials in Delhi on Friday evening, and within the hour leaders of MVA constituents — Shiv Sena, Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) and Congress — went into a huddle and countered BJP’s move with a written complaint addressed to the Chief Election Commissioner.

The BJP alleged three MLAs of the ruling MVA parties — cabinet ministers Jitendra Awhad (Nationalist Congress Party) and Yashomati Thakur (Indian National Congress), besides Shiv Sena legislator Suhas Kande — violated the model code of conduct.

The MVA, in turn, handed a letter signed by Shiv Sena’s Anil Desai, Nationalist Congress Party’s Jayant Patil and Congress’ Balasaheb Thorat, to the ECI chief, seeking that the votes of senior BJP MLA Sudhir Mungantiwar and independent MLA Ravi Rana, who supported the BJP candidate in Friday’s voting, be declared invalid. State Congress president Nana Patole also wrote to the ECI making the same plea.

Both camps cited a similar instance which arose in 2017, when during the election for RS seats from Gujarat the ECI had ruled that the vote of candidate who was found to have violated a rule would not be counted. In that instance, Ahmed Patel of the Congress petitioned the ECI on the issue of two Congress legislators who cross-voted for the BJP; their votes were eventually declared invalid.

Anant Kalse, former secretary of the state legislature said that if all the four candidates of MVA succeeded in getting 42 first-preference votes, and assuming that three votes challenged by the BJP were declared invalid (which would mean that each candidate could lose one first-preference vote), the MVA still stood to win the polls in the first round itself.

“It all depends upon the number of votes. If the total number of valid votes is going down then the quota for winning the polls will also be reduced. It may create a big problem for a candidate having the least number of first preference votes and is dependent upon a second preference vote from other candidates. In such a case, if one of his party candidates could not get votes equal to quota then he cannot transfer his second preference votes to the one who depends upon second preference votes. To transfer second preference votes, a candidate is required to get quota votes,” Kalse said.

He also said that if no candidate could get the votes equal to the quota till the last round then the one having the least votes will be eliminated.

Kalse added that the matter can be challenged in a court of law and the court can also impose a stay. However, normally they don’t interfere, he opined. Reducing the number of valid votes also impacts the quota for each candidate to win the elections, he said.

“The issue can be challenged [by either party] in the court by filing an election petition. The court will go through the decision of returning officer and Election Commission, the past verdicts in such cases, as well as witness statements before giving in its own decision,” Kalse said.

Constitutional expert Ulhas Bapat said that the ECI is the final authority in the matter. “Both the sides have cited the Ahmed Patel case, but it is not comparable,” Bapat said.