Election disputes must be resolved through an Election Petition after electoral processes are completed, as courts typically refrain from intervening during elections to preserve their integrity.

JUDGMENT

Vikas Mahajan, J. (Oral)--The petitioner is contesting as an independent candidate from Ward No.228 (Maujpur) in the ensuing MCD elections. The case of the petitioner is that after acceptance of his nomination papers, he chose his symbol `Torch' as his first preference and symbol `Camera' as his second preference. Another candidate i.e. respondent no.3, who is also contesting independently also chose the same symbol `Torch'.

2. The Returning Officer to resolve the issue had tried mediation and conciliation by calling both the candidates, but since both the candidates were insisting for allotment of `Torch' as their symbol, the Returning Officer held a draw through coupon/chits, in which the petitioner was successful and accordingly he was allotted `Torch' as a symbol. According to the petitioner, the other candidate i.e. respondent no.3 did not protest at that point of time as she had chosen another symbol i.e. `Nagrik'. This process of allotting the `Torch' as symbol, as per the petitioner, was videographed by the Returning Officer.

3. Pursuant to the allotment of symbol, the petitioner also ordered for publication of election material. Subsequently, on 22.11.2022 it transpired from the official website of the State Election Commission that symbol `Torch' has been allotted to respondent no. 3 whereas symbol `Camera' has been allotted to the petitioner. The objection was raised by the petitioner before the Returning Officer and later on a representation was also made by the petitioner to the respondents on 26.11.2022, but the same did not fetch any response.

4. In this factual backdrop, the present writ petition has been filed with the following prayers:

"(i) Issue an order, direction and/or a writ in the nature of certiorari thereby quash the action of the respondent No.2 in allotting the "Torch" Election Symbol to Ms. Babita Sharma;

(ii) Issue an order, direction and/or a writ in the nature of certiorari thereby cancel the Municipal Corporation of Delhi Election-2022, in Ward No.228-Maujpur;

(iii) Issue an order, direction and/or a writ in the nature of mandamus thereby direct the respondents to re-schedule/reconduct the Elections of the said ward No.228-Maujpur by allotting symbol "Torch" to the petitioner;

(iv) To provide for the costs of the present Writ Petition to the petitioners; and/or

(v) Issue any other or further order, direction and/or a writ, as this Hon'ble Court may deemed fit and proper in view of the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice."

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the action of the respondent no.2 in allotting symbol `Torch' to the respondent no.3 after the same had been allotted to the petitioner held on 16.11.2022 by way of draw of lots which was videographed, is illegal.

6. The learned counsel for the petitioner, drawing attention of the Court to Clause 4(d) of the order dated 02.11.2022 issued by the State Election Commission NCT of Delhi in exercise of the power conferred under Section 7 of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957 and Rule 15 of Delhi Municipal Corporation (Election of Councillors) Rules, 2012, submits that all independent candidates are at par for the purpose of allotment of free symbols. Even the candidates belonging to unrecognised parties registered by Election Commission of India have to be treated as independent candidates for all purposes including for allotment of symbols. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, no preferential treatment could have been given to the respondent no.3 and that too behind the back of the petitioner, when the symbol `Torch' was allott