Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATHI
B.KRISHNA MOHAN, J.
Praja Shanthi Party – Appellant
Versus
The Election Commission of India and Others – Respondents
Writ Petition No.8549 of 2024
Decided on : 04-04-2024
(A) Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order, 1968 - Common symbol allotment - Writ petition questioning the rejection of the application for a common symbol for assembly and parliament elections - The petitioner's application was deemed incomplete due to missing annexure details, leading to rejection - The court upheld the decision of the Election Commission, emphasizing the need for diligence in application submissions. (Paras 3, 6, 7)
(B) Writ Jurisdiction - Scope of judicial review - The court found no infirmity in the Election Commission's letter regarding the application process and timelines, thus dismissing the writ petition. (Paras 7, 8)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner sought a common symbol for elections but faced rejection due to incomplete application details. The court noted the importance of timely and complete submissions in electoral processes.
Findings of Court:
The court upheld the Election Commission's decision, stating that the application was processed according to established guidelines and timelines.
Issues: The main issue was whether the rejection of the application was justified based on procedural completeness and adherence to timelines.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the Election Commission's procedures must be followed strictly, and incomplete applications cannot be rectified post-submission.
Result: Writ Petition dismissed.
JUDGMENT :
Heard the party in person and the learned standing counsel for the respondents.
2. This writ petition is filed questioning the action of the respondents in not allotting the common symbol for both assembly and parliament elections having accepted for allotment of symbol to assembly elections in view of the orders passed by the Hon’ble High Court in W.P.No.7420 of 2024 dated 01.04.2024.
3. Earlier also, the similar writ petition was filed vide W.P.No.7420 of 2024, seeking allotment of common symbol either ‘Helicopter’ or any other symbol for the petitioner-party by the respondents therein. After hearing the party in person and the learned Standing Counsel for the Election Commission, this Court passed the order in W.P.No.7420 of 2024 dated 01.04.2024 and the operative portion of the same is as under:
4. In the above said orders, the petitioner’s application dated 19.03.2024 was directed to be considered by the 1st respondent therein as stated above. It was also further observed therein that, in case the petitioner’s application dated 19.03.2024 is not considered finally as per the request made, the petitioner-party in person, is permitted to make a fresh application in proforma duly on or before 12.04.2024 again to the 1st respondent and if so, the same shall be considered strictly in accordance with law.
5. It appears that in pursuance of the orders passed by this Court in W.P.No.7420 of 2024 dated 01.04.2024, the 1st respondent informed the petitioner that the request for allotment of common symbol to the candidates of petitioner-party in the General Elections to the Legislative Assembly of Andhra Pradesh, 2024 has not been accepted as the symbol proposed by the petitioner has either been allotted to the other party or reserved symbols or not from the list of free symbols. Therefore, advised to propose 10-15 more symbols, if any, in preference from the list of free symbols available on the Commission’s website for the consideration of the Commission by 05.04.2024. The party in person advanced his arguments as submitted in the earlier writ petition i.e., W.P.No.7420 of 2024 dated 01.04.2024. The letter of the 1st respondent dated 15.03.2024, addressed to the petitioner which was not under challenge says that the petitioner’s application dated 19.03.2024, was rejected as the application is incomplete. The said letter dated 15.03.2024, said to have been received on 19.03.2024 by the petitioner-party. The 1st notification by the Parliament to conduct the elections in phased manner with respect to the general elections of the year 2024 was issued on 20.03.2024, whereas the petitioner’s application is dated 19.03.2024 and the not
AI
The court upheld the Election Commission's rejection of an incomplete application for a common symbol, emphasizing strict adherence to procedural requirements.
The court reaffirmed that judicial intervention in election processes should be limited and only warranted under clear violations, emphasizing the need for election integrity and established practice....
Point of law: It is the political parties which sponsor candidates, that are in a position to incur large election expenses which often run into astronomical figures. We do not consider that preferri....
The court established that the Election Symbols Order is an order under the Representation of the People Act, and violations can be grounds for election petitions.
The court upholds the right to symbol allotment under the relevant electoral statutes while ensuring procedural compliance.
The court established that the Election Symbols Order is integral to the electoral process and violations must be addressed through election petitions, not writs.
Dismissal of writ for lack of evidence proving political party recognition and symbol allotment.
Judicial intervention in electoral matters, specifically regarding the freezing of election symbols during ongoing elections, must adhere to legal protocols, ensuring electoral integrity and fairness....
Election disputes must be resolved through an Election Petition after electoral processes are completed, as courts typically refrain from intervening during elections to preserve their integrity.
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
