SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2018 Supreme(Bom) 536

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT AURANGABAD
S.S. SHINDE, S.M. GAVHANE, JJ.
Shaluka - Petitioner
Versus
The Union of India & Another - Respondents
Writ Petition No. 6604 of 2010
Decided On : 11-04-2018

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:H.H. Padalkar, Advocate.
For the Respondents:Alok Sharma, Advocate.

Headnote:

Representation of People’s Act, 1951 - Section 29A [2] [b] - Enquiry - Quash - Petitioner and other members of party formed a political party in Party for short ‘said party - Thereafter proposal in respect of registration of said party as political party was submitted before Election Commission Mumbai Maharashtra State Election Commission has given recognition to party of petitioner as a political party- However said recognition is extent of State of Maharashtra- Thereafter member of said party has decided to expand said party in entire nation as a political party- Thereafter petitioner submitted proposal for registration of said party as a political party expand its activities throughout nation under Representation of People’s respondent Commission respondent has raised certain objections- Thereafter petitioner has removed all objection within time –Held, State Election Commission State of Maharashtra and time of seeking of registration Representation of People’s with ECI- Therefore ECI vide letter directed petitioner to clarify actual date of formation of party- It is submitted that petitioner informed actual date of formation of party and same was communicated respondent appears that aforesaid facts stated by respondent have not been disputed by petitioner- However Supreme Court had occasioned consider provisions Representation of People’s and while interpreting provisions of Section Representation People’s Act and explaining its scope Supreme Court held thus From aforesaid provisions it is manifest that Commission is required to consider matter to give opportunity representative of political party and after making enquiry and further enquiry arrive at decision whether to register a political party or not- In view of requirement of law that Commission to give decision only after making an enquiry wherein an opportunity of hearing is be given representatives political party we are of view that Election Commission required act judicially and in that view of matter act Commission is quasi-judicial perusal of affidavit in reply filed by respondent nowhere it is stated that opportunity of hearing was given to petitioner while passing impugned decision which was communicated to petitioner by letter Petition- In that view of matter Petition is allowed impugned decision/letter stands quashed and set aside - Petition disposed

JUDGMENT :

S.S. Shinde, J.

1. Heard. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith, and heard finally with the consent of the parties.

2. This Petition is filed seeking directions to the respondent to consider and decide the representation dated 24.05.2010 in respect of registration of ‘Satya Shodhak Samaj Party’ as a political party for nation and issue registration certificate in favour of the petitioner under the Representation of People’s Act, 1951. It is further prayed to quash and set aside the letter dated 5th March, 2010, issued by under Secretariat of the Election Commission of India i.e. respondent no.2.

3. It is the case of the petitioner that on 23rd December, 2004, the petitioner and other members of the party formed a political party in the name of ‘Satya Shodhak Samaj Party’ [for short ‘said party’]. Thereafter, proposal in respect of registration of the said party as political party was submitted before the Election Commission, Mumbai. On 8th August, 2005, the Maharashtra State Election Commission has given recognition to the party of the petitioner as a political party. However, said recognition is to the extent of State of Maharashtra. Thereafter on 03.11.2008, the member of the said party has decided to expand the said party in the entire nation as a political party. Thereafter on 25.11.2008 the petitioner submitted proposal for registration of the said party as a political party to expand its activities through out the nation, under the Representation of People’s Act, 1951, to respondent no.2. On 17.02.2009, 20.08.2009 and 23.09.2009 the Commission i.e. respondent no.2 has raised certain objections. Thereafter, the petitioner has removed all the objection within time.

4. It is further the case of the petitioner that, on 23.09.2009, respondent no.2 issued a letter to the petitioner and raised objection that, the petitioner had submitted application on 25.11.2008 in the same name under Section 29A of the Representation of People’s Act, 1951, wherein the date of formation of party has been mentioned as 03.11.2008. Clarification is sought how the same Association has been shown to have been formed on two different dates. Thereafter, by letter dated 09.10.2009, the petitioner has replied that the establishment of the said party took place on 23.12.2004. It is further stated in the said letter that neither the said party is established on 30.06.2005 nor on 03.11.2008, but it is established on 23.12.2004. Considering the above clarification given by the petitioner, respondent no.2, by letter dated 05.05.2010, informed the petitioner that, the said party was formed on 23.12.2004, and application was made on 25.11.2008 for registration of the said party. The said application was received by the Commission on 25.11.2008. It is further stated in the said letter that the said application should have been made within 30 days from the date of formation of party as required under Section 29A [2] [b] of the Representation of People’s Act, 1951, and therefore, the application in respect of registration of the said party has been rejected in view of the above said provision.

5. It is further the case of the petitioner that, thereafter the petitioner has filed fresh representation clarifying that the said party was formed as a political party on 23.12.2004 confined to the extent of jurisdiction State of Maharashtra. On 03.11.2008, the said party decided to register and seek recognition at national level, and therefore on 25.11.2008 the proposal was submitted for expanding the jurisdiction of the said party through out the Nation. According to the petitioner, its decision of formation of political party is 03.11.2008, and as per Section 29A [2] [b] of the Representation of People’s Act, 1951, the said proposal is submitted on 25.11.2008 i.e. within thirty days from the date of formation of the said party, respondent no.2 ought to have acceded to the request of the petitioner to register said party at national level.

6. Learned counsel appeari









Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top