(1) THIS writ petition is by the Election Commission of India and is brought before this court under certain extraordinary circumstances. The Commission feels constrained to seek a judicial declaration as to the extent and exclusivity of its jurisdiction, powers and authority in the discharge of its high constitutional functions for the ensurement of the purity of the electoral process in the country which, in the ultimate analyses, constitutes the very foundation and survival of a democratic polity.

(2) ISSUE rule.

(3) ISSUE notices to all the Advocates General of the States which are not, to nomine, parties to the writ petition.

(4) INTERLOCUTORY prayers made in this writ petition overlap similar prayers made in the several transfer petitions and special leave petitions preferred by the Election Commission against the various interlocutory orders of the High courts. We propose to deal with the interlocutory prayers separately in the Special Leave Petitions and TPs.

(5) IT may be recalled that the Election Commission, in its General Order dated 2/8/1993, declared:

"ACCORDINGLY, till such time as the present deadlock, which is solely the making of the government of India, is resolved, the Commission does not find itself in a position to carry out its constitutional obligations in the manner envisaged by the makers of the Constitution, and has accordingly decided that all and every elections under its control, including biennial and bye-elections to the council of States, bye-elections to the State Legislative councils, bye-elections to the House of the People and bye-elections to the State Legislative Assemblies, as have been announced or notified or are in progress, shall remain postponed until further orders. Consequential notifications, wherever necessary, in respect of the elections shown in Annx. XIV are being issued separately."

(6) THOSE consequential directions postponing the polls pursuant to the electoral process earlier initiated till 18/12/1993 have also come to be issued. This postponement affected the poll scheduled to be held on 3/8/1993 for the Pune Local Authorities Constituency to the Maharashtra State Legislative Assembly. One of the candidates, Shri Sharad Pawar, assailed these orders of the Election Commission in Writ Petition (C) No. 2943 of 1993 before the High court of Bombay. The High court passed two interlocutory orders in those proceedings - one dated 2/8/1993, and the other dated 3/8/1993. The effect of these orders was that the poll as scheduled earlier for 3/8/1993 be proceeded with and that the counting of votes should also follow. The poll was held. But. the operation of the latter order as to counting has since been stayed by this court by the order dated 3/8/1993. The result is that while the poll was taken on 3/8/1993, the counting of votes remains stayed.

(7) THE matters were argued at some length by learned counsel. Shri Harish Salve, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the writ petitioner in the High court and Shri K.K. Venugopal and Shri Vaidyanathan, learned Senior Counsel appearing for petitioners in the matters arising from cases in the Madras High court urged that the order of the Election Commission dated 2/8/1993 would stultify the democratic process and that the constitutional jurisdiction of the superior courts was to keep governmental authorities within bounds and that the bar of jurisdiction could be urged to circumvent this constitutional duty of the superior courts.

(8) WHILE we reiterate the judicial perception as to the constitutional position and the plenitude of the powers of the Election Commission as a high and exclusive body charged with the duty, at once sensitive and difficult, of overseeing free and fair elections in the country and that its perceptions of the imperatives for a free and fair elections are not to be interfered with by the courts, we must also indicate that there are no unreviewable discre