IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
J.B.PARDIWALA, ILESH J. VORA, JJ.
Natvarsinh Sardarsinh Mahida – Appellant
Versus
The Gujarat State Election Commission – Respondent
R/Special Civil Application No. 2242 of 2021
Decided on : 19-02-2021
Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 226 - Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporations (Conduct of Election) Rules, 1994 - Rule 5 and 55 - State Election Commission - Writ of mandamus or prohibition - Election of District Panchayats - Free and Fair Election - Seeking order or direction and to quash and set aside circular issued by Gujarat State Election Commission, so far as it relates to sr.no.8 in schedule of programme by directing respondents to keep uniform one date for counting of votes at elections of local bodies and/or to keep date of voting and date of declaration of result as one and same - Whether writ-applicants are entitled to any relief as prayed for in the present writ-application.
Finding of the Court: When Constitution and other governing legislations have already provided a regulatory procedure for conducting a free and fair election, it is not open to think otherwise that by mere declaration of result of Corporation election same will have an influence on the mind of voters in Panchayat and Municipality election. As regards framing of schedule for holding election, matter lies within exclusive domain of Election Commission and same should not ordinarily be interfered with unless exceptional circumstances indicating influence on free and fair election is demonstrated - 'Free' and 'fair' are two small and simple words of English language but two words are so powerful that entire democracy of this country is dependent on same. Therefore, all the actions of Election Commission must be of such a nature that they should instill confidence in mind of people including poorest of the voters hailing from the most underprivileged and lower strata of society. State Election Commission, as far as possible, should avoid taking a certificate from any court that 'Rome burned while Nero fiddled'.
Result: Writ-application rejected.
JUDGMENT :
J.B.PARDIWALA, J.
The Supreme Court, in the case of Mohinder Singh Gill and others vs. The Chief Election Commissioner, New Delhi and others, reported in AIR 1978 SC 851, quoted the aforesaid statement of Sir Winston Churchill with approval and thought fit to add the following to the aforesaid statement :
“If we may add, the little, large Indian shall not be hijacked from the course of free and fair elections by mob muscle methods, or subtle perversion of discretion by men dressed in little, brief authority. For 'be you ever so high, the law is above you'.”
1. By this writ-application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the writ-applicants have prayed for the following reliefs :
(B) Be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or prohibition or any other appropriate writ, order or direction and to restrain the respondents, their agents and servants from commencing the counting of votes at the elections of the municipal corporations on 23.02.2021 till and until the elections of the District Panchayats, Taluka Panchayats and Municipalities are over, by an appropriate writ, order or direction;
(C) Pending admission and final disposal of the present petition, be pleased to restrain the respondents, their agents and servants from fixing and keeping the different dates of counting in case of the municipal corporations, and different date of counting in case of the elections of the District Panchayats, Taluka Panchayats and the Municipalities;
(D) That this Hon'ble Court will be pleased to issue interim direction, directing the respondent no.1 to fix the date of counting in election of all the local bodies including the Municipal Corporations, District Panchayats, Taluka Panchayats and the Municipalities to one and uniform date, by way of interim direction, till and pending hearing and final disposal of this petition;
(E) Be pleased to pass such other and further orders as may be deemed fit and proper.”
2. The case put up by the writ-applicants may be summarised as under :
2(1) The three writ-applicants are residents of the Taluka Borsad, District Anand. The writ-applicant no.1 is the former President of the District Panchayat, Anand, and the writ-applicant no.2 is the former President of the Borsad Taluka Panchayat.
2(2) The subject matter of challenge in the present writ-application is the Circular issued by the State Election Commission dated 23rd January 2021, declaring the election programme for the ensuing elections to the 6 Municipal Corporations, 81 Municipalities, 31 District Panchayats and 231 Taluka Panchayats in the State of Gujarat.
2(3) The impugned Circular providing for the election programme reads thus :
A.K.M.Hassan Uzzaman and others vs. Union of India and others
ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA vs. ASHOK KUMAR AND OTHERS
Kesavananda Bharati (Kesavananda Bharati vs. State of Kerala 1973 (4) SCC 225)
Rampakavi Rayappa Belagali vs. B.D.Jatti
Election Commission of India through Secretary vs. Ashok Kumar
N.P.Ponnuswami vs. The Returning Officer
Kuldip Nayar vs. Union of India
Jyoti Basu v. Debi Ghosal (1982 (1) SCC 691 : 1982 (3) SCR 318)
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.