Bilal Nazki, J.

This petition has been filed by the petitioners seeking quashing of an order passed by respondent No.2 on 11th April, 2009.

2. Petitioner No.1 is a political party, petitioner No.2 is a Registered Trust, and other petitioners are citizens. Respondent No.2 passed an order dated 11th April, 2009, which reads as under:-

“In continuation of the Commission’s Order No. 3/4/ID/2009/SDR dated 6th April, 2009, the Commission directs that ‘Ration Cards’ issued on or before 28-2-2009 shall also be permitted as an additional document for establishing the identity of electors at the General Election to the House of the People in the State of Maharashtra.”

3. Earlier to it, an order was passed on 6th April, 2009. The order dated 11th April, 2009 is in addition to the one dated 6th April, 2009.

4. The grievance of the petitioners is that ration cards are not basically identity cards, and as such, ration cards should not be taken as proof of identity of a voter, as there are chances of mischief since a large number of ration cards are fake. In this case, the petitioners had also presented in the Court that some ration cards were manifestly not genuine. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that even otherwise, the ration card is never taken as proof of somebody’s identity, and other Departments of the Government are also not taking ration cards as proof of identity. He submits that the Reserve Bank of India has issued directions that ration card should not be taken as proof of identity. Similarly, the Government of India, Ministry of Consumer Affairs and Food and Public Distribution Department, as on June 22, 2001, issued similar directions. But, on the other hand, we have seen some documents, in which, if one has to apply for passport, the Passport Authorities consider the ration card as proof of residence.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioners has further submitted that the Notification, which was issued on 6th April, 2009, mentioned 13 documents for proving the identity of a voter, and all these 13 require a photograph, whereas, in the State of Maharashtra, no photograph is affixed on a ration card. Therefore, this has been done in order to facilitate bogus voting in the ensuing election.

6. Respondent No.2 has filed a counter-affidavit, in which it has stated that in terms of Section 61 of the Representation of People Act, 1951, the Commission is obliged to take measures and prescribe procedure for preventing impersonation of electors, and therefore, circulars are being issued from time to time. It submits that the ideal situation would be when all the voters have Elector Photo Identity Card (EPIC), but there are number of genuine voters who do not have EPIC. Therefore, such voters cannot be deprived of their right to vote. It was held that even after allowing identities to be established in terms of order dated 6th April, 2009, there may be genuine voters who may not be in possession of any of the documents mentioned in that order.

7. We have gone through the order, and we can also perceive that some of the voters may not be in a position to produce a document as mentioned in the order dated 6th April, 2009. It can be in anybody’s knowledge that everybody is not supposed to have a Passport, a Driving Licence, Income Tax Identity (PAN) Card, Service Identity Card, Passbook issued by Public Sector Bank, Property Documents, SC/ST/OBC Certificate, Pension documents, Freedom Fighter Identity Card, Arms Licence, Certificate of Physical Handicap, Job Card issued under NREGS and Health Insurance Scheme Smart Card. The population, which will not be having such an identity proof with him may, on the other hand, have a ration card.

8. In the counter-affidavit, it has been stated by the respondents that in the State of Maharashtra, 75% to 80% people have already EPIC. It is only about 25% of the population which will be required to prove their identity before they are allowed to vote in terms of order