The time period for substituting candidates in election petitions under Section 116 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 is mandatory, and failure to comply within the specified 14 days results in barring of the application.

JUDGMENT :

Krishna Rao, J.

1. The respondent no.6 has filed an application being G.A. No. 3 of 2025 for recalling of the order dated 19th December, 2024 and for allowing the respondent no. 6 to file written statement.

2. One Mr. Tarik Hasan has filed an application being G.A. No. 4 of 2025 for substitution in place of Returned Candidate, namely, Sk. Nurul Islam and to file written statement.

3. Originally, the petitioner, namely, Smt. Rekha Patra has filed an Election Petition being E.P. No. 3 of 2024 for declaring the returned candidate from the 18-Basirhat Parliamentary Constituency of District North 24 Parganas in the House of the People as void and to set aside.

4. In the Election Petition, the petitioner had made all together 16 respondents including Chief Election Commissioner and Returning Officer being the respondent nos. 15 and 16. The respondent no.1 is the returned candidate and the respondent no.2 was the candidate set- up by the All India Secular Front, the respondent no.3 was the candidate set-up by the Communist Party of India (Marxist), the respondent nos. 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 11 and 13 were independent candidates, the respondent no. 7 was set-up by the Bahujan Samaj Party, the respondent nos. 9, 12 and 14 were set-up by the Bharatheeya Jawan Kisan Party, Socialist Unity Centre of India (Communist) and Mulnibashi Party of India respectively.

5. The Notice of the Election Petition was served upon the respondent no.1 on 8th August, 2024. On 24th September, 2024, the respondent no.1 passed away. The respondent nos. 15 and 16 have entered appearance and filed their respective written statements. Other respondents inspite of service of notice of the Election Petition, have not entered appearance. During pendency of the case, the respondent nos. 15 and 16 have filed an application for deletion of their names from the case and accordingly by an order dated 13th August, 2025, the name of the respondent nos. 15 and 16 were deleted from the case.

6. By an order dated 13th August, 2025, this Court directed the petitioner for taking appropriate steps by publishing in the “Calcutta Gazette” in compliance of the provisions of Section 116 of the Representation of Peoples Act, 1951 read with Rule 41 of the Election Petition Rules, 1967 of the High Court at Calcutta. In compliance with the order, the petitioner has published Gazette on 8th September, 2025. On publication of Gazette, the respondent no. 6 and one Mr. Tarik Hasan, applicant herein have filed their respective applications being G.A. No. 3 of 2025 and G.A. No. 4 of 2025.

7. Mr. Bilwadal Bhattacharyya, Learned Senior Advocate representing the petitioner raised an objection and submits that the applications filed by the respondent no. 6 and Mr. Tarik Hasan, are barred by limitation. He submits that as per Section 116 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 and the Rule 41 of the Election Petition Rules, 1967 of the High Court at Calcutta, provides that within 14 days from the date of publication, apply to substitute in place of the returned candidate but both applications have been filed after the period of 14 days. In support of his submissions, he has relied upon the judgment in the case of Election Commission of India Vs. Telangana Rastra Samithi and Another reported in (2011) 1 SCC 370 and submits that the Representative of the People Act, 1951, is a complete code for the conduct of elections by the Election Commission of India appointed under Article 324 of the Constitution of India which provides for superintenden