Judgement

CHANDRACHUD, CJI. (On behalf of himself and Desai, A. P. Sen and Venkataramaiah, JJ.) (Majority view) :- There are four appeals. and a Transferred Case before us. The appeals arise out of interim orders passed by a learned single Judge of the Calcutta High Court on February 12 and 19, 1982 which were confirmed by him on February 25, 1982. Those orders were passed in a Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution asking for the writs of mandamus and certiorari, directing that the instructions issued by the Election Commission should not be implemented by the Chief Electoral Officer and others; that the revision of electoral rolls be undertaken de novo; that claims, objections End appeals in regard to the electoral roll be heard and disposed of in accordance with the rules; and that, no notification be issued under S. 15(2) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 calling for, election to the West Bengal Legislative Assembly, until the rolls were duly revised.

2. Transferred Case No. 3 of 1982 Is that very writ petition. It was withdrawn for hearing and final disposal to this Court by an order dated March 4, 1982. That writ petition was filed- by eight persons against the Union of India, the Election Commission the Chief Election Commissioner and the Chief Electoral Officer, West Bengal. The writ petitioners, who succeeded in obtaining interim orders from the High Court are in the array of respondents in the four appeals. Three out of those appeals are filed by persons who contend that the High Court ought not to have interfered with the election process which was imminent. The fourth appeal, No. 742 of 1982, is tiled by the Election Commission of India, the Chief Election Commissioner and the Chief Electoral Officer, West Bengal. Their contention is that the High Court had no jurisdiction to entertain the writ petition by reason of Art. 329(b) of the Constitution, that the election process which had already begun should not have been interfered with by the High Court and that the recommendation made to the Governor of West Bengal by the Election Commission under section 15(2) of the Act of 1951 was being thwarted by frivolous and baseless objections raised by the writ petitioners.

3. The writ petitioners are enrolled as voters in the electoral roll of the West Bengal Legislative Assembly. The validity of several provisions of the Representation of the People Act, 1950, the Representation of the People Act, 1951, the Registration of Electors Rules, 1960, arid the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961 was challenged in the writ petition but, it is unnecessary to spend any time over that matter since, the validity of none of those provisions was questioned before us. Shorn of that challenge, it is doubtful whether the High .Court would have passed the impugned orders. Be that as it may, what is to be noted is that the points which are raised for cur consideration do not involve the validity of any law and are restricted to illegalities and irregularities alleged to have been committed by the Chief Electoral Officer, West Bengal, and by the officers subordinate to him in regard to the preparation of the electoral rolls which would be used for the purposes of election to the West Bengal Legislative Assembly.

4. The Chief Electoral Officer, by a Circular dated March 12, 1981, asked all the District Officers and the Sub-Divisional Officers under him to make a de novo intensive revision of the electoral rolls for the general election to the Legislative Assembly, West Bengal, without reference to the then existing electoral rolls. The grievance of the writ petitioners is that the guidelines or instructions issued by the Chief Electoral Officer were not only not adhered to by the subordinate officers but were blatantly violated in certain cases. It is alleged, for example, that the exact extent of the polling areas was not demarcated clearly, no house to house visits were made and, the names of the members of each house