The court established that candidates must be given notice and an opportunity to be heard before disqualification for failing to lodge election expense accounts, as mandated by the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act and its rules.

JUDGMENT :

P.V. Kunhikrishnan, J.

These writ petitions are connected, and therefore, I am disposing of these cases by a common judgment. When the State Election Commission declares a person disqualified for failure to lodge an account of election, whether a detailed enquiry, after hearing the parties, is necessary is the short point to be decided in this case.

2. The petitioners were candidates in the election conducted in the General Election to the Local Self-Government Institutions in Kerala in the year 2020. They were disqualified as per the impugned orders in these writ petitions invoking the powers under Section 33 of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act , 1994 (for short, the Act 1994). The short point raised by the petitioners is that such an order is passed without affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and without issuing a show-cause notice. Hence, these writ petitions.

3. Heard counsel for the petitioners, the Special Government Pleader and the Standing Counsel appearing for the State Election Commission.

4. Section 86 of the Act 1994 deals with the lodging of accounts with the officer authorised by the State Election Commission by a contesting candidate at an election. It will be better to extract Section 86 of the Act 1994:

“ Section 86 : Lodging of accounts with the officer authorised by the State Election Commission.

Every contesting candidate at an election shall, within 30 days from the date of election of the returned candidate lodge with the officer authorised by the State Election Commission, an account of his election expenses along with the connected records which shall be a true copy of the account kept by him or by his election agent under Section 85 . The said officer shall, as soon as may be, immediately after the expiry of the said period of 30 days, make available to the officer appointed by the Commission, the accounts of election expenses received by him along with a list of candidates who did not lodge the accounts of election expenses prescribed by the Commission.”

5. Section 85 of the Act 1994 deals with the mandate of keeping separate and correct accounts of all expenditure in connection with the election by the candidate or his election agent, and also the mandate that the maximum expenditure shall not exceed such amount as may be prescribed. Section 33 of the Act 1994 deals with the disqualification for failure to lodge account of election expenses. It will be better to extract of the Act 1994:

“ Section 33 : Disqualification for failure to lodge account of election expenses.

If the State Election Commission is satisfied that a person -

(a)has failed to lodge an account of election expense within the prescribed time and manner and has no sufficient reason or justification for such failure; or

(b)The accounts lodged are false;

(c) Has incurred election expenses exceeding the prescribed limit.

the State Election Commission shall, by order published in the Gazette, declare him to be disqualified and any such person shall be disqualified for a period of five years from the date of the order.”

6. Rule 59 of the Kerala Panchayat Raj (Conduct of Election) Rules 1995 (for short Rules 1995) says about the procedure to be followed by the State Election Commission. It will be better to extract Rule 59 of the Rules 1995, which is relevant here.

“Rule 59: Report by the officer authorised by the State Election Commission as to the lodging of the account of election expenses and the decision of the State Election Commission thereon

(1) As soon as may be after the expiration of the time as specified inSection 86 for the lodging of the account of election expenses at any election, the District Election Officer shall report to the State Election Commission,—

(a) n