SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2017 Supreme(HP) 459

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Chander Bhusan Barowalia, JJ.
Raju Thakur - Petitioner
Versus
State Election Commission and others - Respondents
CWP No. 975 of 2017
Decided On : 29-05-2017

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr. B.C. Negi, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Nitin Thakur, Advocate.
For the Respondents:Mr. Dilip Sharma, Senior Advocate, with Ms. Nishi Goel, Advocate, Mr. Shrawan Dogra, Advocate General, with Mr. Anup Rattan, Mr. V.S. Chauhan, Additional Advocate Generals, Mr. Kush Sharma and Mr. Puneet Rajta, Deputy Advocate Generals.

Headnote:

ELECTION - MUNICIPAL CORPORATION - POSTPONEMENT - VALIDITY - ELECTION COMMISSION - POWERS AND FUNCTIONS - CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, ARTICLES 243U, 243ZA - HIMACHAL PRADESH MUNICIPAL CORPORATION ACT, 1994, SECTIONS 5, 9 - HIMACHAL PRADESH MUNICIPAL CORPORATION ELECTION RULES, 2012, RULES 22, 23, 24, 33 - INTERPRETATION.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner, a candidate for the Shimla Municipal Corporation elections, challenged the order passed by the State Election Commission (respondent No.1) postponing the elections due to alleged errors in the electoral rolls. The petitioner argued that the postponement violated the provisions of Article 243U of the Constitution of India, which mandates the completion of elections to a Municipality before the expiry of its five-year duration.

Finding of the Court:

The Court held that the order passed by respondent No.1 postponing the elections was not in accordance with the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Kishansing Tomar vs. Municipal Corporation of the City of Ahmedabad and others (2006) 8 SCC 352. The Court observed that the provisions of Article 243U of the Constitution are mandatory in nature and have to be followed in all respects. The Court further held that the revision of electoral rolls was required to be carried out in time by the respondents and if they have not been carried out within the time frame, then the election has to be conducted on the basis of the existing electoral rolls.

Issues: 1. Whether the order passed by the State Election Commission postponing the elections was valid? 2. Whether the provisions of Article 243U of the Constitution of India were violated by the postponement of elections?

Ratio Decidendi: The Court held that the order passed by respondent No.1 postponing the elections was not in accordance with the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Kishansing Tomar vs. Municipal Corporation of the City of Ahmedabad and others (2006) 8 SCC 352. The Court observed that the provisions of Article 243U of the Constitution are mandatory in nature and have to be followed in all respects. The Court further held that the revision of electoral rolls was required to be carried out in time by the respondents and if they have not been carried out within the time frame, then the election has to be conducted on the basis of the existing electoral rolls.

Final Decision: The Court quashed and set aside the order passed by respondent No.1 postponing the elections and directed the respondents to conduct the elections no later than 18.6.2017 and to constitute the new body of duly elected representatives of the Corporation latest by 19.6.2017. The Court also directed that the elected and nominated body of the existing Municipal Corporation shall not be permitted to be in office after 4.6.2017.

JUDGMENT :

Tarlok Singh Chauhan, J.

Aggrieved by the order passed by respondent No.1 on 9.5.2017 (Annexure P-2) whereby the elections to the Shimla Municipal Corporation have been postponed, the petitioner has filed the instant writ petition for the following substantive reliefs:

“(i) Issue a writ of certiorari to quash Annexure P-2 i.e. office order dated 09.05.2017.

(ii) Issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondent authorities not to implement Annexure P-2 i.e. office order dated 09.05.2017.

(iii) Issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondent authorities to conduct election on time and to constitute a duly elected Shimla Municipal Corporation on or before 04.06.2017.

(iv) Issue a writ of mandamus directing the concerned authorities to initiate appropriate necessary disciplinary proceedings against erring officials and qua removal of the present incumbent heading respondent No.1.”

Certain undisputed facts may be noticed.

2. The previous elections to Municipal Corporation, Shimla were held in May, 2012 and the Municipal Corporation was constituted on 4.6.2012 with a term of five years which admittedly is due to expire on 4.6.2017, on which date a new elected body is required to be constituted as per the mandate of law.

3. This position is not even disputed by respondent No.1, who in its reply has admitted that the term of the Municipal Corporation is going to expire on 4.6.2017. However, it is submitted that the Deputy Commissioner, Shimla in the capacity of Electoral Registration Officer (respondent No.2) vide letter dated 30.3.2017 was asked by respondent No.1 to get the draft electoral rolls verified. The schedule for the preparation of electoral rolls was also issued and sent vide letter dated 11.4.2017. This exercise of verification of the electoral rolls was started by respondent No.2 and thereafter even the draft electoral rolls were published on 11.4.2017 for calling objections. However, a very large number of complaints were received regarding errors in such rolls not only from the various political parties like Bhartiya Janta Party (BJP), Communist Party of India (Marxist) (CPM) (Annexures R-1/3 and R-1/4), but even the Municipal Corporation had passed unanimous resolution (Annexure R-1/5) requesting that the date for filing objections and suggestions be extended. In the meanwhile, this Court also in its order dated 27.4.2017 in CWP No. 815 of 2017 directed the acceptance of complaints on Sunday the 30th April, 2017 and on Monday the 1st May, 2017. This direction was fully carried out and it was still expected that the polls would be held timely.

4. The respondent No.2 completed the process and even published the final electoral rolls on 5.5.2017. However, the political parties as also certain interested persons were still not satisfied with the final electoral rolls and again made numerous complaints annexed with the reply as Annexures R-1/7 to R-1/14. Discrepancies in the electoral rolls were even highlighted by the print media. Thus, it became absolutely clear that there were still errors in the electoral rolls and efforts to correct them in time had not succeeded.

5. It was with a view to check this situation that the Election Commission of India (office of the Chief Electoral Officer, H.P.) was requested vide letter dated 5.5.2017 to intimate the office of respondent No.1 the total number of voters enrolled in Legislative Assembly segments relatable to the area of Municipal Corporation, Shimla. The Chief Electoral Officer informed that total number of such electors as per their record as on 1.1.2017 was 85,546 and it appeared that this was much lower than the number of voters published in the electoral rolls for the Shimla Municipal Corporation on 5.5.2017 which was 88,167.

6. It was further averred that while some difference always remains, yet in the instant case the difference was substantial and moreover,

































































































































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top