State Congress leaders unhappy with poll pact, blame Patole

MUMBAI: The seat-sharing pact of the Maharashtra Vikas Aghadi (MVA) has led to trouble within the Congress, as several leaders from Mumbai to Sangli are unhappy with the seats the party has got in the deal. The leaders are blaming state Congress president Nana Patole, who they believe mishandled the discussion process.

MLA and former minister Vishwajeet Kadam, who was insisting on the Sangli seat, openly expressed his ire on this. Kadam also declared that he would announce his next step on April 10.

When asked whether Vishal Patil, an aspirant from Sangli who is being supported in his endeavour by Kadam, would contest from Sangli as an independent candidate, Kadam replied with “No comment”. Patole, however, rejected the possibility. Insiders said the Shiv Sena had promised Patil a Rajya Sabha seat to ensure that he refrained from any act that would go against the MVA.

The Congress and its local leaders wanted Mumbai South Central, Bhiwandi and Sangli, claiming that they had better candidates in all three constituencies. Patil’s name had been finalised for Sangli and Mumbai Congress president Varsha Gaikwad was to fight from Mumbai South Central. But even as the discussions were on, the Shiv Sena (UBT) chose to unilaterally declare Chandrahar Patil and Anil Desai’s names from Sangli and Mumbai South Central.

Days later, the NCP (SP) too declared Suresh Mhatre’s name for the Bhiwandi seat. The Congress was left fuming and with all its hopes dashed, as its leadership chose to succumb to the obstinacy of its allies and sacrifice the seats. Gaikwad spoke to Congress general secretary K C Venugopal, who is believed to have expressed his displeasure with the decision. Gaikwad was not available for comment.

An annoyed Congress leader questioned Sena (UBT) chief Uddhav Thackeray’s remark that the seat-sharing formula had been finalised based on winnability. “If winnability was the criteria, then how come we have been asked to contest the Mumbai North seat when we all know that the party will not win considering its current demographic?” he demanded. “The Sena (UBT) would have done well from that seat.”

Another Congress leader alleged that Patole was more interested in the Vidarbha seats, as he believed the party would do well in Vidarbha this time. “To focus on the areas where the party can perform better is a good strategy but it cannot be at the cost of neglecting other regions,” the leader said, pointing out that the Congress got seven of Vidarbha’s 10 seats.

A Congress functionary said that Patole had not had a pre-discussion meeting with party leaders even once before going for the MVA meeting on seat-sharing. “Our leaders attended the meeting without any strategy,” he claimed. “They did not even have survey reports to support their claim unlike the Shiv Sena (UBT) and NCP (SP).”

After the seat-sharing announcement, Patole told reporters that the party leaders would abide by the decision. “We will convince everyone and they will respect the decision taken by the Congress leadership,” he said in response to questions on unrest in the party.