Back
1993 Supreme(Guj) 310
Gujarat High Court
Judgename :A.P.RAVANI, C.V.Jani
Madhubhai Jaliabhai Bhai - Appellant
Versus
T.N.Sheshan - Respondent
S.C.A.7881 of 1993
Decided On : 08/16/1993
The Election Commission of India, being a constitutional body, is entitled to great respect and deference. Its actions should not be lightly interfered with by the courts.
Headnote:
ELECTION LAW - BIENNIAL ELECTION TO COUNCIL OF STATES - CHANGE OF DATE OF POLL AND COMPLETION OF ELECTION - NOTIFICATION BY ELECTION COMMISSION - CHALLENGE TO VALIDITY - MAINTAINABILITY OF WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION - JURISDICTION OF HIGH COURT - SCOPE AND EXTENT - ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA - POWERS AND FUNCTIONS UNDER ARTICLE 324 OF THE CONSTITUTION - INTERPRETATION AND APPLICATION OF SECTIONS 39 AND 153 OF THE REPRESENTATION OF THE PEOPLE ACT, 1951 - CONSTITUTIONALITY - ARTICLES 14 AND 19 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA.
Fact of the Case:
Petitioners, members of the Gujarat Legislative Assembly and voters for the biennial election to the Council of States from Gujarat, challenged the validity of a notification issued by the Election Commission of India changing the date of poll and completion of election for the biennial election to the Council of States from Gujarat. They also sought to declare sections 39 and 153 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, unconstitutional and ultra vires.
Finding of the Court:
The court observed that the Election Commission had acted with great restraint and circumspection in the matter and had endeavored to resolve the issue amicably. The court noted that the Election Commission had issued a fresh notification advancing the date of poll to 17th August 1993, taking into account all relevant considerations. In light of these developments, the court granted permission to the petitioners to withdraw the petition.
Issues: 1. Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to entertain a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging the validity of a notification issued by the Election Commission of India changing the date of poll and completion of election for the biennial election to the Council of States? 2. Whether sections 39 and 153 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, are unconstitutional and ultra vires being violative of articles 14 and 19 of the Constitution of India?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the Election Commission of India, being a constitutional body, is entitled to great respect and deference. The court observed that the Election Commission had acted with great restraint and circumspection in the matter and had endeavored to resolve the issue amicably. The court further noted that the Election Commission had issued a fresh notification advancing the date of poll to 17th August 1993, taking into account all relevant considerations. 2. In light of the Election Commission's actions, the court found it unnecessary to decide the constitutional validity of sections 39 and 153 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.
Final Decision: The court granted permission to the petitioners to withdraw the petition. The rule issued earlier was discharged.
( 1 ) THE petitioners are members of the Stale Legislative Assembly of gujarat and they are voters for the purpose of biennial election to the Council of State (Rajya Sabha) from the State of Gujarat. The pelitioners challenge the legality and validity of notification annexure-A dated August 2, 1993 issued by the Election commission of India by which the date of biennial election to the Council of States of members from the State of Gujarat is changed. By the said notification the date of poll- 6th August, 1993 - has been shifted to 18th December, 1993, and the date of completion of election which was 10th August, 1993 has been shifted to 22nd December, 1993. The petitioners also pray that the order dated 2nd August, 1993 passed by the Election commission of India, produced at annexure-H to the petition, in which detailed reasons for issuing the notifications have been mentioned be also quashed and set aside. The petitioners pray that the provisions of section 39 and section 153 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 be declared unconstitutional and ultra vires being violative of articles 14 and 19 of the Constitution of India.
( 2 ) ON August 5, 1993 the petition was moved by way of urgent circulation. This court ordered to issue Rule and furhter directed to issue notice to the other side as to hearing of interim relief. The notice was made returnable on August 7, 1993. On August 7, 1993 hearing of interim relief took place. This Court heard the learned advocates appearing for the parties, and after taking into consideration the pursis submitted by the state Government of Gujarat arid after taking into consideration other relevant facts and circumstances of the case requested the Election Commission to reconsider its decision of shifting the date of poll from 6th August, 1993 to 18th December. 1993 and the date of completion of election from 10th August, 1993 of 22nd December, 1993 The Court further requested that the schedule of election be refixed so as to complete the election process latest by August 17, 1993. The Court made it clear that the request made to respondents No. 1 and 2 was not to be treated as a relevant circumstance while considering the question about the jurisdiction of this Court to entertain the petition under Article 226 of the Conslitiution of India. The question with regard to the maintainability of the petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India was kept open and it was to be decided by the Court without in any way being infludenced by the said order.
( 3 ) THEREAFTER, the petition was called out on August 9,1993. At the request of the learned counsel appearing for respondents No. 1 and 2. i. e. the Chief Election commissioner of India and the Election Commission of India, hearing of the petition was adjourned to August 16,1993.
( 4 ) TODAY when the petition came up for hearing, learned counsel for the petitioners has placed on record a copy of the order passed by the Honble Supreme Court of India in writ petition No. 60s of 1993 and other companion matters. It appears that the Election commission of India had preferred a transfer petition before the Honble Supreme Court of India as arising out of the order passed by this Court on August 7,1993 in this petition. The Honble Supreme Court has observed as follows:"vii. Transfer petition No. (unnumbered ). . /93 (Arising out of the order dated 7th August, 1993 in SCA No. 7881 of 1993 of the High Cort of Gujarat: by this transfer petition the Election Commission seeks to have SCA No. . 7881 of 1993 on the file of the High Court of Gujarat - (Madhu Bhai vs. T. N. Seshan) Withdrawn to this Court. We have perused the orders made by the High Court of Gujarat in the wirt petition. The High Court, if we may say so with respect, has acted with great restraint and cricumspection. It has requested the Election Commission, in view of its high constitutional position, to resolve the matter in a satisfactory manner. There is an equ
