The Supreme Court has exclusive jurisdiction to decide doubts and disputes arising out of or in connection with the election of the President under Article 71 of the Constitution.

( 1 ) WHILE democratic fibres of this Republic are under stress and the very concept of rule of law is under pressure and acrimonious imputations and unsavoury allegations against persons in high office having become the order of the day, the petitioner, a zestful social worker has filed this petition for preserving our sacred Constitution and thus claiming for issuing a writ of certiorari to quash provisions of Sections 5b and 5c of the Presidential and Vice Presidential Elections Act 1952 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and also for a direction commanding the respondents to bring the provisions of the said Act in its primitive stage so as to bring the said provisions practicable and matching to in conformity with the constitutional norms by giving proper public notice. It has further been sought for issuing a direction commanding the respondent No. 4 not to proceed further with the election of the President and also not to accept any nomination paper and refrain him from conducting elections till unconstitutional amandments and defects in the said Act are removed or rectified. A direction has further been claimed commanding the respondent No. 2 Sri Giani Zail Singh, President of India to protect the Constitution of India and wellbeing of the people in accordance with the oath taken by him and also directing respondent No. 2 Sri Giani Zail Singh, President of India, Respondent No. 3 Sri Rajiv Gandhi, Prime Minister of India and respondent No. 4 Sri R. V. S. Peri Shastri, Chief Election Commissioner of India to dispose of the telegrams sent by the petitioner and which are annexed as Annexure-3 to the writ petition before proceeding with the election of the President.

( 2 ) FACTS in a narrow compass as are revealing from the petition are that the petitioner is aggrieved by the incorporation of Sections 5b and 5c of the Act which according to him are unconstitutional being inconsistent with the provisions of Article 58 as enshrined in the Constitution. Another contention of the petitioner is that the public notice of an intended election referred to in Section 5 of the Act and Rule 3 of the Presidential and Vice Presidential Rules 1974 (hereinafter called the Rules) has not been published as provided in Form-I. The case of the petitioner further is that only such person who is the cream of the nation shall be elected President of India who is capable of upholding the constitutional guarantees and obligations and is competent to preserve the welfare of the people for which he has taken oath as enshrined in Article 60 of the Constitution of India.

( 3 ) NOTICES of the petition were accepted on behalf of all the respondents by Sri N. B. Singh Senior Standing Counsel of the Central Government.

( 4 ) IN view of the controversy encompassing interest of the people at large and considering multiple complications it may have, it was considered expedient to seek the assistance of the Advocate General which was readily forthcoming. It has been submitted by the learned Advocate General that the petitioner has no locus standi in the case in filing this petition. It has further been submitted that this High Court has no jurisdiction to entertain the petition. The learned Advocate General has further submitted that the provisions of Section 5b and Section 5c of the Act are not in conflict with Article 58 of the Constitution. Lastly it has been pointed out that the petitioner can claim appropriate relief within the scope of Article 71 (1) of the Constitution before the Supreme Court. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents has strenuously urged that the election process has been put into motion by issuing the notification as provided in the Act read with the rules and as such this petition is not maintainable.

( 5 ) THE petitioner, who appeared in person, the learned Advocate General and the Senior Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents have been heard at length.

( 6 ) THE first content