The absence of petitioners and legal counsel during the Supreme Court hearing creates doubts about their real intention
Team Clarion
MUMBAI – The Supreme Court’s recent dismissal of the petition challenging the renaming of Aurangabad has ignited a fresh debate over the political and legal motives behind the case. The absence of the petitioners and their legal counsel during the crucial hearing has led to allegations of mishandling and political conspiracy.
Ziauddin Siddiqui, president of the Muslim Representative Council, which has been at the forefront of opposing the name change, expressed deep concerns over the conduct of the case. He pointed out that Hisham Osmani, former Aurangabad city president of the Congress, resigned in protest when the Maha Vikas Aghadi government decided to change the city’s name. “Hisham Osmani left the party and joined the struggle against this decision, and our council supported him fully,” Siddiqui stated.
The case initially saw progress when NCP’s Mushtaq Ahmed filed a petition in the high court, garnering support from various quarters. However, after a lengthy hearing, the petition was rejected. “When the high court rejected the petition, we consulted influential figures in the city and convened a meeting to strategise about taking the matter to the Supreme Court. Mushtaq Ahmed was notably absent from this meeting, which raised eyebrows,” Siddiqui said.
He also revealed that Mushtaq Ahmed had earlier shown no interest in pursuing the case further in the Supreme Court. “He told us he had no intention of filing a petition in the Supreme Court. Yet, without informing anyone, he suddenly moved the case forward. On the day of the hearing, both he and his lawyer were absent, leading to the dismissal of the petition.”
The absence of key players during the Supreme Court hearing has led many to speculate about the real intentions behind the legal battle. “Why didn’t Mushtaq Ahmed attend our meeting if he was serious about the case? And why did he say he didn’t want to pursue it, only to file the petition secretly?” Siddiqui asked. He further pointed out that a similar scenario played out with the petition challenging the name change of Osmanabad, where the petitioner, also linked to the NCP, mishandled the case in the Supreme Court, resulting in another dismissal.
Siddiqui believes that political parties may have used the legal system to quickly dispose of the issue, fearing backlash from Muslim voters in the upcoming elections. “It appears that political figures wanted to resolve the matter through the courts as quickly as possible so they wouldn’t have to face uncomfortable questions during the election campaign. They can now conveniently say that the court has decided and nothing more can be done.”
The controversy over Aurangabad’s renaming has been a contentious issue since it was first proposed by the Maha Vikas Aghadi government. After coming to power, Chief Minister Eknath Shinde reversed the previous administration’s decision and issued a new order, with both the Mahayoti and Maha Vikas Aghadi adopting similar positions on the matter.
Despite the setbacks, Siddiqui remains optimistic that justice can still be sought. He noted that there is an option to file a review petition in the Supreme Court, which could potentially reopen the case. The path forward, however, remains fraught with legal and political challenges, as suspicions about the true motives behind the case continue to linger.
