TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (3) TMI 1457
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....agar. The brief facts leading to the present writ petition are that on 07.02.2015, the State Election Commission published a Schedule of the elections to the various Municipal Corporations of Punjab including that of Municipal Corporation, SAS Nagar. The last date for filing nominations was 11.02.2015, whereas the scrutiny of nominations was to be held on 12.02.2015. On 11.02.2015, the petitioner submitted his nomination paper from Ward No.47, Municipal Corporation, SAS Nagar, as a candidate set up by the Shriomani Akali Dal. However, the nomination paper submitted by the petitioner was rejected on 12.02.2015. The reasoning recorded by the Returning Officer - respondent No.2, when translated, reads as under: "I, Navjot Kaur, PCS, Additional Chief Administrator, GMADA -cum- Returning Officer, Municipal Corporation Mohali, District SAS Nagar, during the scrutiny of the nomination papers of candidates on 12.02.2015 in accordance with the Punjab State Election Commission Act, 1994, have found from scrutiny off the nomination papers of Sh. Sukhdev Singh Patwari S/o Late Sh. Bhag Singh, Flat No.2732-C, Sector - 70, that the number of the Voter List which is mentioned in Form ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....and 255 votes respectively. Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently argued that it was a clerical mistake, when petitioner relied upon the Electoral Rolls of Legislative Assembly rather than the Electoral Rolls of Municipal Corporation, which the Returning Officer was bound in law to permit the petitioner to correct the same. Therefore, the order passed by the Returning Officer - respondent No.2 is legally not sustainable. On the other hand, Mr. Bhardwaj has argued that once the election process is set in motion, the only remedy of an aggrieved person is to file an election petition after the conclusion of the elections and not to intervene in the process of election by filing a writ petition. He also referred to Article 243 ZG of Part IX-A of the Constitution to assert that the writ petition would not be maintainable after the election process is set in motion. Reference is made to the judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court reported as N.P.Ponnuswami Vs. Returning Officer, Namakkal Constituency AIR 1952 SC 64; Mohinder Singh Gill Vs. Chief Election Commissioner (1978) 1 SCC 405 and Anugrah Narain Singh Vs. State of U.P. (1996) 6 SCC 303 as well as a Division Bench judg....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... at naught the process and, therefore, not a step towards the goal and hence liberated from the coils of Article 329(b)? And, if this act or step were to be shielded by the constitutional provision, what is an aggrieved party to do? This takes us to the enquiry about the ambit of Section 100 of the Act and the object of Article 329 (b) read with Article 324. Such is the outline of the complex issue projected before us. xxx xxx 26. ........ The rainbow of operations, covered by the compendious expression election, thus commences from the initial notification and culminates in the declaration of the return of a candidate. The paramount policy of the Constitution-framers in declaring that no election shall be called in question except the way it is provided for in Article 329 (b) and the Representation of the People Act, 1951, compels us to read, as Fazal Ali, J. did in Pannuswami, the Constitution and the Act together as an integral scheme. The reason for postponement of election litigation to the post-election stage is that elections poll not unduly be protracted or obstructed. The speed and promptitude in getting due representation for the electors in the- legisla....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....se of elections. The Court held as under: "24. The validity of Sections 6-A, 31, 32 and 33 of the U.P. Act dealing with delimitation of wards cannot be questioned in a court of law because of the express bar imposed by Article 243-ZG of the Constitution. Section 7 contains rules for allotment of seats to the Scheduled Castes, the Scheduled Tribes and the Backward Class people. The validity of that Section cannot also be challenged. That apart, in the instant case, when the delimitation of the wards was made, such delimitation was not challenged on the ground of colourable exercise of power or on any other ground of arbitrariness. Any such challenge should have been made as soon as the final order was published in the Gazette after objections to the draft order were considered and not after the notification for holding of the elections was issued. As pointed out in Lakshmi Charan Sen's Case, that the fact that certain claims and objections had not been disposed of before the final order was passed, cannot arrest the process of election." In Harnek Singh Vs. Charanjit Singh & others (2005) 8 SCC 383, the issue in respect of elections for the post of Chairman, Panchayat Sa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion of mixing of ballet papers before counting instead of counting polling station-wise. The petitioners have sought the suspension of the said notification. The prayer for interim relief was opposed by the Election Commission relying upon Article 329 of the Constitution. However, the High Court directed the Election Commission to make directions in such a way counting was conducted booth-wise consistent with the guidelines dated 22.09.1999 instead of notification dated 01.10.1999. The issue examined was: "12. The issue arising for decision in these appeals is the jurisdiction of the High Court to entertain petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and to issue interim directions after commencement of the electoral process." After considering the judgments on the issue, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held as under: "28. Election disputes are not just private civil disputes between two parties. Though there is an individual or a few individuals arrayed as parties before the Court but the stakes of the constituency as a whole are on trial. Whichever way the lis terminates it affects the fate of the constituency and the citizens generally. A conscientio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... (2) Any decision sought and rendered will not amount to calling in question an election if it subserves the progress of the election and facilitates the completion of the election. Anything done towards completing or in furtherance of the election proceedings cannot be described as questioning the election. (3) Subject to the above, the action taken or orders issued by Election Commission are open to judicial review on the well-settled parameters which enable judicial review of decisions of statutory bodies such as on a case of mala fide or arbitrary exercise of power being made out or the statutory body being shown to have acted in breach of law. (4) Without interrupting, obstructing or delaying the progress of the election proceedings, judicial intervention is available if assistance of the Court has been sought for merely to correct or smoothen the progress of the election proceedings, to remove the obstacles therein, or to preserve a vital piece of evidence if the same would be lost or destroyed or rendered irretrievable by the time the results are declared and stage is set for invoking the jurisdiction of the Court. xx xx" Learned couns....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion, under the provisions of the Election Commission Act. The aforementioned conclusions, however, shall not be construed to oust the jurisdiction of a High Court, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. A High Court's power of judicial review is merely postponed, to a time and a stage, after the conclusion of the election and then also to a judicial appraisal of any judgment or order that may be passed by an Election Tribunal, duly constituted in terms of Section 73 of Election Commission Act. xxx xxx 29. However, the High Court's jurisdiction to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction to further the cause of an election would not be affected, in any manner, as such a petition does not call into question an election. A petition, seeking an expeditious conclusion of an election, or filed with the object of facilitating the conduct of an election, would not be a cause, calling into question, an election and, adjudication, thereof would not be declined, by relegating the aggrieved petitioner to the remedy of filing an election petition. Thus, the words, appearing in Article 243-ZG(b) of the Constitution, clearly postulate that the legislative in....