In the lead-up to the Maharashtra polls, observers were cautious in their predictions. The battle between two major alliances, each with three main members, would be too close to call, they said.

It was an election in an unprecedentedly splintered landscape, with two Shiv Senas, one each led by Eknath Shinde and Uddhav Thackeray; two NCPs, one each led by Ajit Pawar and Sharad Pawar; and a wave of rebels and independents. 

But when the results came in on November 23, it turned out that the governing Mahayuti block had swept the vote, winning 234 seats in the 288-member house. 

More surprisingly, of the three main members of this alliance, the BJP itself came close to winning a majority, scoring 132 seats. This domination by a single party was a far cry from the fragmented coalition politics that the state has experienced since the last election in 2019, with strong implications for Maharashtra’s governance, stability and development.

Also evident from the results is the state’s absence of a pan-Maharashtrian regional party and strong sub-regional parties to address the distinct political and cultural needs of its distinctly varied regions.

In Tamil Nadu, the Dravidian parties – the AIADMK and DMK – have historically dominated with strong, ideologically-driven and cohesive regional identities, consistently appealing to regional pride, social justice, and linguistic identity. In the last five assembly elections in the state, from 2001 to 2021, the DMK and AIADMK have a cumulative seat share ranging from 157 to 223 out of 234 seats, leaving national parties like the Congress way behind. (The BJP made its debut in Tamil Nadu only in 2021 with four seats.)

In contrast, Maharashtra’s political scene has fragmented significantly in recent years. Traditional regional powerhouses like the Shiv Sena and NCP have split into competing factions, allowing the BJP to emerge as a dominant force. The absence of a unified regional party has left a political vacuum in the state that the BJP has capitalised. While Tamil Nadu’s politics are rooted in a strong regional ethos, Maharashtra’s has given way to a more centralised BJP-led regime, marking a clear divergence in the political trajectories of the two states. 

So, how has Maharashtra changed since the first assembly polls in Bombay state in 1952? What does the future hold? 

Let’s break it down.

New state, new divisions

Maharashtra is India’s third largest state by area, with an estimated population of about 13 crore in 2024. It shows strong regional variation in social structure, caste and tribes, and economic and human development, linked to its distinct history in colonial times. Its political landscape has been shaped by its state formation, which involved the coming together of regions with vastly different political histories, economic conditions, and sociological compositions. 

This included portions of the Bombay Presidency, the princely state of Hyderabad (Marathwada), parts of the Central Provinces and Berar (Vidarbha), and Khandesh, all contributing to the distinct circumstances and opportunities defining the new state’s political climate. 

Based on these historical links and cultural references, the districts today can be broadly grouped into Bombay-Konkan (western coast), Bombay-Desh (western), Bombay-Khandesh (north-west), Hyderabad-Marathwada (south-east), and Vidarbha (north-east).  Voting patterns in each of these regions have been impacted by caste, language and differing levels of development.

The formation of the new Bombay state was a significant event in India’s political reorganisation after independence. It came to be by merging the areas of Bombay province (excluding Sindh) and the princely states within its jurisdiction (Deccan and Gujarat states). It stretched from northern Gujarat to northwestern Karnataka, encompassing one-third of present-day Gujarat and most of Maharashtra, while Vidarbha and Marathwada remained outside its boundaries. 

In the 1920s, calls began for a united Marathi-speaking state. These intensified post independence with the Nagpur Pact of 1953 proposing to unite Bombay state with Vidarbha and Marathwada. Meanwhile, Gujarat’s leaders pushed for a separate state, creating tensions over the ownership of the city of Bombay, which was economically dominated by Gujaratis but surrounded by Marathi-speaking districts. The States Reorganisation Committee report in 1955 suggested keeping Bombay state bilingual and granting Vidarbha statehood. This was rejected, leading to continued agitations from both sides.

In 1956, the State Reorganisation Act redefined bilingual Bombay state to include a diverse range of territories. These consisted of the existing state of Bombay (Konkan, Desh and Khandesh) and excluding districts and talukas that went into northern Karnataka, and one taluka that went into Rajasthan. It incorporated parts of the Hyderabad princely state including Aurangabad, Parbhani, Bhir (now Beed), Nanded and Osmanabad districts, and a few taluks from Bidar and Adilabad, forming the Marathwada region.

It also included districts from erstwhile Central Provinces and Berar such as Buldhana, Akola, Amravati, Yeotmal, Wardha, Nagpur, Bhandara and Chanda that formed Vidarbha, along with Kutch and Saurashtra (which later went into Gujarat).

But demands and protests continued from Samyukta Maharashtra and Gujarati leaders. So, on May 1, 1960, Bombay state was split to form Maharashtra and Gujarat with 264 and 132 assembly seats respectively, marking the culmination of linguistic reorganisation efforts. 

Over 70 years of elections  

After independence, the Congress dominated politics in Bombay state, winning 267 out of 317 seats in the 1951-52 assembly polls. Morarji Desai, a Gujarati, became its first chief minister, but he was replaced in 1956 by Yashwantrao Chavan following criticism during the Samyukta Maharashtra movement, where over 100 protesters were killed in police firing. Under Chavan’s leadership, the Congress won 234 of 396 seats in the 1957 polls, cementing its political dominance.

Maharashtra state’s first assembly elections in 1962 were critical in determining Maharashtra’s political destiny. The Congress again was the domination force capturing 215 of 264 seats, receiving more than 51 percent of the vote. Other parties gained some traction, like the Peasants and Workers Party of India with 15 seats, the Praja Socialist Party with nine, and the Communist Party of India with six. The Akhil Bharatiya Jana Sangh, the predecessor of the BJP, fielded 127 candidates but won no seats.

This period saw the formation of the Congress’s ‘Bahujan politics’ – a cross-sectional coalition of agrarian groups, including the Marathas and Kunbis and marginalised communities like Dalits and Muslims. Under leaders like Chavan and Vasantrao Naik, the Congress developed into a formidable political force that was capable of managing the state’s regional and socioeconomic challenges. 

The Congress retained its hold through the 1970s despite internal splits, corruption scandals, and trade union unrest. But challenges emerged with the rise of Sharad Pawar and the Shiv Sena’s growing influence under Bal Thackeray. 

In 1995, the Sena-BJP alliance came to power, signaling the rise of Hindutva politics. In 1999, the Congress-NCP coalition returned for 15 years with leaders like Vilasrao Deshmukh and Ashok Chavan. In 2014, the BJP emerged as the dominant player under Devendra Fadnavis, leveraging the Modi wave. 

After the 2019 polls, tensions between the BJP and Shiv Sena resulted in the formation of the Maha Vikas Aghadi, an unprecedented alliance of the Shiv Sena, Congress and NCP with Uddhav Thackeray as chief minister. Finally, the Shiv Sena and NCP fragmented, leading to the Shinde-Fadnavis-Ajit Pawar government that’s currently in place.

A splintered state of affairs 

But what happened in 2019 that led to such cracks? 

The 2019 assembly polls, held in October that year, recorded a pre-poll NDA majority. But the BJP-Shiv Sena alliance soon collapsed over power-sharing disputes. The Shiv Sena and NCP, both still united parties, allied with the Congress and Uddhav became chief minister.

In 2022, Eknath Shinde rebelled and departed the Shiv Sena with a clutch of MLAs. The party split and the MVA was toppled, giving way to a BJP-Shiv Sena (Shinde) government. Further turmoil came a year later, when Ajit Pawar defected from the NCP to join the BJP-Shiv Sena (Shinde) alliance, solidifying the Mahayuti coalition. 

Looking back at 2019 through the lens of parties rather than alliances, we can spot regional patterns. 

In 2019, the BJP had pan-Maharashtra appeal, winning at least 30 percent of seats in each region. Its stronghold was Vidarbha, headquartered in Nagpur, with close to 47 percent of seats. 

Konkan region saw a close contest between the undivided Shiv Sena (38.67 percent of seats) and BJP (36 percent), with undivided NCP (eight percent) and Congress (5.33 percent) trailing far behind. 

In Desh, the NCP got 38.82 percent of the vote followed by BJP (29.41 percent) and Congress (15.29 percent), with Shiv Sena and independents playing marginal roles. 

In Marathwada, the BJP led with 34.78 percent followed by Shiv Sena (26.09 percent) and NCP and Congress (17.39 percent each).

In Bombay-Khandesh, the BJP got 40 percent while the Shiv Sena and Congress each got 20 percent and the NCP just five percent.

Overall, the BJP dominated Vidarbha and Khandesh, the Shiv Sena held strong in Konkan, and the NCP led in Desh, while the Congress maintained a secondary role across regions. Independent candidates showed localised strength, reflecting Maharashtra’s fragmented electoral dynamics. 

So, over the last six decades, Maharashtra has experienced multiple shifts, marked by fragmentations and volatile coalitions. The once-dominant Congress first splintered with the formation of Sharad Pawar’s NCP, which fragmented further with Ajit Pawar’s factions. 

Parallely, the rise of regional and Hindutva politics – encapsulated by the Shiv Sena and BJP – reshaped the state’s social dynamics. The BJP, as the Jana Sangh’s successor, evolved from winning no seats in 1962 to dominating Maharashtra today. Its stronghold was strengthened across the state in this year’s assembly polls, indicating that Maharashtra might see another chapter now – one of single party domination. 

The news cycle moves so quickly that it can be hard to keep up. But we’ve got you covered. Subscribe to Newslaundry for stories that help you make sense of politics in India.