The main legal principle established in the judgment is the preservation of free and fair elections as a fundamental aspect of democracy. The court emphasized the importance of upholding the integrity of the electoral process and invoked its jurisdiction to ensure the purity of the democratic electoral system.

JUDGMENT :

Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, CJI.

1. Leave granted.

2. The present appeal arises from an interim order of a Division Bench of the High Court of Punjab & Haryana¹[“High Court”] dated 31 January 2024. The order impugned originates in a writ petition alleging electoral malpractices by the presiding officer who conducted the election to the post of Mayor at the Chandigarh Municipal Corporation. The High Court issued notice and listed the petition after three weeks, but it declined to stay the result of the election or grant any other interim relief. The appellant approached this Court assailing the Order and raised serious allegations about the sanctity of the election. With the course the proceedings have taken, this judgment will result in a final order on the writ petition before the High Court.

3. Section 38 of the Punjab Municipal Corporation Act 1976²[“Act”], extended to the Union Territory of Chandigarh by the Punjab Municipal Corporation Law (Extension to Chandigarh) Act 1994³[Act No 45 of 1994], provides that the Chandigarh Municipal Corporation shall, at its first meeting in each year, elect one of its elected members to be the Mayor of the Corporation. Section 60(a) of the Act provides that the meeting for the election of the Mayor shall be convened by the ‘Divisional Commissioner’, who shall nominate a councillor who is not a candidate for the election, to preside over the meeting. Similarly, Regulation 6(1) of the Chandigarh Municipal Corporation (Procedure and Conduct of Business) Regulations 1996⁴[“Regulations”] provides that a meeting for the election of a Mayor shall be convened by the ‘prescribed authority’ who shall nominate a Councillor who is not a candidate to preside over the meeting. The Deputy Commissioner of the Union Territory of Chandigarh has been designated as Presiding Authority for this purpose by a Notification dated 4 October 1994.

4. On 10 January 2024, Shri Vinay Pratap Singh, IAS, Deputy Commissioner, Union Territory of Chandigarh acting in his capacity as the Prescribed Authority directed the convening of a meeting of the Councillors in terms of Section 38 of the Act at 11 am on 18 January 2024. The seventh respondent, Shri Anil Masih, one of the councillors who was not standing for the mayor election was nominated as the presiding authority. The agenda of the meeting was to conduct the election of Mayor, Senior Deputy Mayor, and Deputy Mayor of the Corporation and the elected Councillors desirous of contesting the election were called upon to file their nominations for the posts.

5. A writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution was instituted by the appellant in the High Court seeking a direction to the Deputy Commissioner to ensure that free and fair elections take place for the posts of Mayor, Senior Deputy Mayor and Deputy Mayor of the Municipal Corporation which were scheduled to be held on 18 January 2024 and for the appointment of a commissioner under the auspices of the High Court to supervise the election process.

6. During the course of hearing the appeal, the appellant submitted that he would be content if the petition was disposed of with directions to the official respondents to (a) acknowledge the acceptance of the withdrawal of the candidature of certain individuals for the three electoral posts; (b) permit persons nominated by the contested candidates to observe the proceedings of the elections; and (c) video record the entire election process.

7. In response to the above submission, it was stated on behalf of the respondents representing the various authorities, inter alia, that the entire voting and election process would be video recorded. Likewise, it was stated that the Chandigarh police would ensure that free and fair elections take place. In view of the position adopted by the authorities, by an Order dated 17 January 2024 (a day before the proposed election), the petition was disposed of by a Division Bench of the High Court.

8. Elections were not conducted on 18