Professor MP Singh: Shaper of Constitutional Discourse
09 Mar 2026
Dehadrai Seeks Dismissal of Moitra's Dog Custody Suit
11 Mar 2026
Supreme Court Grants Bail to Porsche Father in Swap Case
11 Mar 2026
Natural Gas Supplies Prioritized Under Section 3 Essential Commodities Act Amid LNG Disruptions: Central Govt Order
11 Mar 2026
Delhi High Court Directs Ministries, CBFC to Implement Film Accessibility Features for Disabled Persons per RPWD Act Guidelines
11 Mar 2026
Foreign Nationals Entitled to Article 22(1) Grounds of Arrest in Known Language: Karnataka HC Sets at Liberty but Orders Handover to FRRO
11 Mar 2026
Madras HC Permits CBSE Student to Appear for Maths as Additional Subject Despite Policy Violation in Peculiar 'Rat Race' Circumstances
11 Mar 2026
Supreme Court Grants Anticipatory Bail to Neha Rathore
11 Mar 2026
Menaka Guruswamy Elected India's First Openly Queer Rajya Sabha MP
11 Mar 2026
Back
Next 
SUBBA REDDY SATTI, VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA
Chevireddy Mohith Reddy, S/o. Chevireddy Bhaskar Reddy – Appellant
Versus
Election Commission of India, Rep. by its Chief Election Commissioner – Respondent
Headnote: Read headnote
ORDER :
Subba Reddy Satti, J.
This Writ Petition is filed seeking the following relief :
A. declaring the proceedings issued vide Memo No.18/CEO-Peshi/ 2024-2 dated 17.05.2024 by the Respondent No.2 being per seillegal, Unconstitutional being violative of provisions of the Representation of the Peoples Act, 1951, Conduct of Elections Rules, 1961 and Handbook for Returning Officer, 2023 and consequently direct the respondents to conduct e-novo/ to reschedule the scrutiny of Form 17A and other documents in 166-Chandragiri Assembly Constituency and pass such order(s) ...
B. declaring the actions of Respondents in not conducting repolling in P.S.No.64 - Neladaanipalle Of Pakala Mandal, P.S.No.110 - Chinna Ramapuram Of Chandragiri Mandal, P.S.No.156 - Kasipentla Of Chandragiri Mandal, P.S.No.157 - Kalroad Palle of Chandragiri Mandal as illegal, Unconstitutional being violative of provisions of the Representation of the Peoples Act, 1951, Conduct
Election disputes must be resolved through election petitions as per Article 329(b) of the Constitution, not through writ petitions.
Election disputes must be resolved through election petitions under the Representation of the People Act, 1951, not through writ petitions, due to the constitutional bar under Article 329(b).
The main legal point established in the judgment is that election disputes falling within the domain of Chapter II of R.P. Act, 1951 should be challenged through a properly constituted election petit....
Writ petitions challenging election irregularities must be addressed by election tribunals, not courts, emphasizing the constitutional bar on judicial interference in electoral matters.
Reason for rejecting 348 votes is stated as improper signing of the declaration appended to the postal ballot papers and, in fact, the said attestation is empowered to the officials of the election c....
Election petitions must provide specific allegations of procedural violations to maintain cause of action; vague claims without factual substantiation are insufficient.
The validity of the elections must be tested in election petitions under Section 176(5) of the 1994 Act.
Election petitions must demonstrate a prima facie case of irregularities for recounting of votes; non-framing of issues does not invalidate proceedings if parties understand the disputes.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
Listen Article