Back
2002 Supreme(P&H) 479
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
J.S. Khehar and Adarsh Kumar Goel, JJ.
Lakhbir Singh Sehmee - Applicant
Versus
State of Punjab - Respondents
C.M. Nos. 10151-52 of 2002 and C.M. No. 11593 of 2002 in C.W.P. No. 17874 of 2001.
Decided On : 30 April, 2002
For the Applicant :Shri M.L. Sarin, Sr. Advocate with Shri B.S. Jaswal, Advocate.
For the Respondent: Shri Harbhagwan Singh, AG, Punjab.
The absence of delimitation cannot be a ground for stalling the election, and the Court may allow a further period for delimitation if no prejudice is shown against the constitutional mandate for holding elections within the specified time.
Headnote:
Delimitation - Municipal Corporation Elections - Punjab Municipal Corporation Act, 1976 - Section 8 - Article 243-U of the Constitution - Article 243-P(g) - C.M. No. 10152 of 2002 - C.W.P. No. 17874 of 2001
Fact of the Case:
A writ petition was filed for the preparation of fresh voters list and division of wards as per Section 8 of the Punjab Municipal Corporation Act, 1976. The petitioners were prospective candidates for Municipal elections and sought equal division of wards based on population. The writ petition was dismissed as infructuous due to the Government's decision to undertake fresh delimitation of wards. Subsequently, an application was filed to recall the order and restrain the respondents from issuing any election process during the pendency of the application.
Finding of the Court:
The Court held that while delimitation is desirable, the absence of delimitation cannot be a ground for stalling the election. It directed the delimitation to be carried out as early as possible, particularly in view of the undertaking already given by the State. The Court also allowed the State's request for a further period of four months from the date of publication of final figures for delimitation.
Issues: 1) Whether delimitation is a must before every election and whether in absence of delimitation, proposed election should not be allowed to be held; 2) Whether absence of published figures of population is a valid ground for not holding delimitation; 3) Whether the State is bound by the undertaking given in its reply to the writ petition for delimitation.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court emphasized that while delimitation is necessary from time to time, the absence of delimitation cannot be a ground for stalling the election. It also highlighted the importance of adhering to the constitutional mandate for holding elections within the specified time. The Court allowed the State's request for a further period for delimitation, considering the absence of prejudice to the petitioner against the constitutional mandate.
Final Decision: C.M. Nos. 10151-52 of 2002 are dismissed, and C.M. No. 11593 of 2002 for grant of further period of four months from the date of publication of final figures is partly allowed. Delimitation may now be carried out within four months from today.
Adarsh Kumar Goel, J. - C.M. No. 10152 of 2002 has been filed under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure for recalling order dated 20.11.2001 passed by a Division Bench of this Court in C.W.P. No. 17874 of 2001.
2. Before dealing with the said application, it is necessary to mention brief background preceding the filing of the present application.
3. A writ petition was filed for issuance of a direction to prepare fresh voters list of each of the wards and to divide wards as per Section 8 of the Punjab Municipal Corporation Act, 1976 (for short, the Act).
4. It was stated in the writ petition filed on 8.11.2001 that the petitioners were prospective candidates for Municipal elections to be held for Amritsar Municipal Corporation in May, 2002 and while earlier voters list was prepared in the year 1996, thereafter there was sea change in the number of voters; number of voters had gone up from six lacs to more than eight lacs; some voters have died, some have shifted from one place to another. It was further stated that there were 60 wards in the city and though Section 8 required that the city should be divided in such a way that population of each ward is, as far as possible, same throughout the city and since there has been uneven growth of population, population of different wards was different; while in some wards the population was 6000 to 9000, while in others it was more than 16000 and if non-registered voters are taken into account, it may be more than 20000. Annexure P-1 was annexed with the petition to show population in different wards.
5. Notice of motion was issued and a reply was filed by the Joint Secretary, Department of Local Government, Punjab wherein it was stated that the Government has already decided to have fresh voters list and delimitation of wards was to be completed approximately within four months.
6. Vide order dated November 20, 2001 the writ petition was dismissed as infructuous in view of stand taken in the reply.
7. It appears that inspite of stand taken in reply to the writ petition to undertake fresh delimitation of wards and to complete it within four months, this course was not adopted and vide letter dated 21.3.2002, Annexure P-10 to the application, Election Commission was informed that the delimitation need not be done for the elections of Municipal Corporations of Amritsar and Ludhiana, as final published figures of 2001 census were not available. Aggrieved by the said letter, this petition has been filed.
8. In the application now filed i.e. C.M. No. 10152 of 2002, it is stated that the Director, Local Bodies had issued instructions to Commissioner, Municipal Corporation on 14.12.2002 to send names of five members out of election councillors for constitution of a board for carrying out delimitation and though some staff was deputed for assessing the total population, the work of delimitation was completed to the extent of more than 60 percent, a decision was lateron taken to go to the election without delimitation of wards. It is stated that action of respondents in deviating from the earlier decision amounted to playing fraud on the Court and since fresh voters list was being prepared, there was no difficulty in dividing the wards in equal voters as per Section 8 of the Act.
9. C.M. No. 10151 of 2002 has been filed for restraining the respondents from issuing any process of election during the pendency of C.M. No. 10152 of 2002.
10. Notice of the application was issued to the State of Punjab and a reply has been filed, along with an application being C.M. No. 11593 of 2002 for extension of time of four months from the date final published figures of census becomes available for delimitation of wards. It is stated that the last elections were held on 27.4.1997 and first meeting of the elected body was held on 27.5.1997 and therefore, elected body has to be constituted on or before 27.5.2002 in view of mandate of Article 243-U of the Constitution. It is stated that delimitati
