IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
SUMAN SHYAM, S.M.MODAK, JJ.
Brajendra Kumar Singh @ Kshatriya Brajendra Singh And Ors. - Petitioners
Versus
The Learned Collector And District Magistrate, Mumbai City And Ors. - Respondents
Writ Petition (L) No. 40050 Of 2025
Decided On : 09-12-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. eligibility for election participation based on prior terms. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. arguments against nomination rejection and circular validity. (Para 4 , 6 , 11 , 12) |
| 3. court's reasoning on election process and statutory remedy. (Para 10 , 13 , 15 , 16 , 18) |
| 4. writ court's reluctance to intervene with statutory remedies. (Para 17) |
| 5. next steps and implications for election proceedings. (Para 19 , 22 , 23) |
Judgment :
Not on board. Taken on production board.
1. The seven Petitioners herein are the members of the Respondent No.5 i.e. The Jackson Co-operative Credit Society of the employees of the Western Railway Limited, which is a Multi State Co-operative Society. The elections in the society are scheduled to be held on 22nd December, 2025. As per Rule 15(1)(c) of The Railways Services (Conduct) Rules, 1966, the Petitioners being Railways’ employees, who have held more than two elective terms in the office of the society, are required to obtain permissions from the employer for participating /contesting the elections. There is a Circular dated 27th February, 2020, which restricts the members who have held more than two terms, from contesting the elections of the society.
2. The Circular dated 27th February, 2020 provides that the government servants can hold elective office in any body in their entire career for a period of two terms or for a period of five years, whichever is earlier. The criteria laid down by the Circular dated 27th February, 2020 is in modification of similar criteria laid down in the earlier Office Memorandum dated 5th August, 2019, wherein, the embargo was for two terms or four years.
3. The Petitioners had earlier not be granted permission to participate / contest the election. As such, they had approached this Court by filing Writ Petition (L) No.33706 of 2025 inter-alia assailing the Circulars dated 5th August, 2019 as well as 27th February, 2020. However, during the pendency of the Writ Petition, the Petitioners had, with the leave of the Court, submitted applications seeking sanction of the authorities under Rule 15(1) (c). Such sanction was granted by order dated 27th November, 2025. Therefore, Writ Petition (L) No.33706 of 2025 was withdrawn by the Petitioners with liberty to approach again as and when a fresh cause of action arises.
4. The Respondent No.1 i.e. the Collector and District Magistrate, Mumbai City has been appointed as Returning Officer to conduct the election of the Respondent No.5-Society and the election schedule of the society has also been notified fixing the date of election on 22nd December, 2025. The Petitioners had submitted their nominations. However, by the communication dated 8th December, 2025, their nominations stood rejected. The ground for rejection of the nominations, as indicated in the letter dated 8th December, 2025, is on account of the fact that the Petitioners did not meet the requirement of Circular dated 27th February, 2020 issued by the Department of Personnel and Training, Ministry of Personnel, Government of India. Aggrieved thereby the present Writ Petition has been filed inter-alia assailing the validity of the Circular dated 27th February 2020. By way of interim relief, the Petitioners have sought a direction upon the Respondent No.1 / Returning Officer to provisionally accept their nominations and allow them to contest the election scheduled to be held on 22nd December, 2025.
5. The prayers made in Writ Petition are extracted herein below for ready reference:-
“a) By an appropriate Writ and/or direction and/or order of this Hon’ble Court, the letter/communication dated 08/12/2025 under reference no. RO/JCCS-BOD/ Election/2025-3030/20 issued by Respondent no.1 (annexed to the petition at Exh.L) be quashed and set aside and Respondent no.1 be directed to publish fresh list of valid nominations by including the name of the petitioners herein;
b) By an appropriate Writ and/or direction and/or order, this Hon'ble Court be pleased to hold and declare th
Statutory remedies should be exhausted before seeking writ relief; election eligibility must adhere to defined criteria as per issued Circulars.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the violation of the petitioner's fundamental right to participate in the election process due to the inconsistency between Bye-law 24(viii) and Se....
once an election process has been set in motion, though the High Court may entertain or may have already entertained a writ petition, it would not be justified in interfering with the election proces....
Cross-nomination between candidates in same constituency does not disqualify; rejection without valid statutory reason is illegal.
Rejection of a nomination is unlawful if no specific disqualifying provision exists, affirming the statutory right to contest elections.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the bar under Section 73D of the M.C.S. Act does not apply to the petitioner for contesting the election to the Managing Committee of the coop....
Sub-rules (4) and (4A) would specifically make it clear that what was being sought to be explained by explanation was with regard to right to be included in a voters list and therefore, eligibility t....
The election jurisprudence, its principles and the applicability of election laws have different delineations and dimensions. They indeed operate, and has to be allowed to operate in their own way so....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.