Back
ARIJIT BANERJEE, APURBA SINHA RAY
Block Development Officer – Appellant
Versus
Surajit Pramanik – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Arijit Banerjee, J.)
1. This appeal is directed against a judgment and order dated August 3, 2023, passed on a writ petition filed by the respondent nos. 1 and 2 herein being WPA 15705 of 2023. The writ petition is still pending before the learned Single Judge.
2. The respondent no. 1 herein aspired to contest the Panchayat General Elections, 2023, in the State of West Bengal. He filed his nomination papers. His nomination was rejected on the alleged ground of mis-match of the electoral data of his proposer as mentioned in the nomination papers.
3. Being aggrieved, the respondent no. 1 (herein after referred to as ‘Surajit’) approached a learned Judge of this Court by filing the present writ petition. Surajit alleged that his nomination papers had been tampered with by the Panchayat Returning Officer (in short ‘PRO’).
4. On behalf of the PRO it was submitted that prior to rejection of Surajit’s nomination, an opportunity of hearing was granted to him as well to as his proposer. None responded when their names were announced calling then for a hearing. Scrutiny of the nomination papers was carried out strictly following the relevant rules and according to the pre-announced
The rejection of nomination papers constitutes an election dispute, resolvable only through an election petition as per statutory provisions, emphasizing judicial restraint in electoral matters.
Election disputes must be addressed through statutory remedies, and writ petitions are not maintainable when an alternative remedy exists under the relevant election laws.
A writ petition is not maintainable to challenge an order of rejection of nomination paper by the Returning Officer/competent authority having regard to the provisions in Article 243-O of the Constit....
The court reiterated the principles of non-interference in the election process by the courts, the requirement to exhaust the remedy of filing election petitions for challenging the validity of elect....
The court affirmed that challenges to election nominations must be made post-election through an election petition, as per Article 329(b) of the Constitution.
Interference in electoral matters after results are declared is barred by Articles 243-O and 243-ZG; the appropriate recourse is through an election petition.
Writ courts cannot intervene in nomination rejections during electoral processes under Article 226; jurisdiction is limited unless significant administrative errors invalidate the election process.
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
