Back
2014 Supreme(All) 584
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
(Lucknow Bench)
BEFORE : RAJIV SHARMA AND MAHENDRA DAYAL, JJ.
NATIK PARTY ......Petitioner
Versus
UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS ......Opposite Parties
(Writ Petition No. 154 (M/B) of 2014, decided on 14th March, 2014)
Counsel :
C.B. Pandey and Maria Kirmani for the Petitioner; Manish Mathur and Akhilesh Misra for the Respondents.
Headnote:Representation of the People Act, 1951—Section 29-A—Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order, 1968—Paras 9 and 10-B—Election—Election symbols—Unrecognised registered political party—Allotment of—As per the amended provisions of para 10-B, a registered unrecognized party could apply for one-time concession of common symbol at a general election during the period of six month prior to the date of expiry of the House concerned—Under this provision, Aam Admi Party, which was then a registered unrecognised party, applied for the “broom” symbol as its common symbol for the general election to the Legislative Assembly of Delhi—The said party submitted its application dated 14.6.2013 and was allotted the common symbol “broom”—But the petitioner-Natik Party had not submitted any application for the “broom” symbol for the election in Delhi—Then contention of the petitioner that the Aam Aadmi Party was illegally allotted the “broom” symbol, totally misconceived because the petitioner party had no right or claim whatsoever on the said symbol mainly because the concession of allotment of a common symbol granted to it under paragraph 10B of the Symbol Order to contest the Legislative Assembly in Uttar Pradesh, 2012—Paragraphs 9 and 10 of the Symbol Order not ultra vires of the Constitution and R.P. Act., 1951—However direction issued by the Court to allot symbol to the petitioner. [Pars 47 to 56]
By the Court.—Short counter-affidavit filed today on behalf of opposite parties Nos. 2 and 3, counter-affidavit as well as additional affidavit filed today on behalf of opposite party No. 4 and rejoinder-affidavit to the short counter-affidavit filed on behalf of opposite party Nos. 2 and 3, are admitted to record.
2. With the consent of learned Counsel for the parties, we proceed to hear the matter finally.
3. Heard Mr. C.B. Pandey, assisted by Ms Mariya Kirmani, Counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Manish Mathur, Counsel for the opposite parties Nos. 2 and 3 and Mr. Akhilesh Kalra, assisted by Mr. Piyush Agarwal, Counsel for the opposite party No. 4.
4. The instant writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner, which is an unrecognized registered political party in the State of U.P., for declaring Para 9 and 10 of the Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order, 1968 as ultra vires the Constitution and Rules of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. It has also been prayed that Election Commission of India may be directed to allot the symbol “Broom” to the petitioner for contesting Lok Sabha Election, 2014.
5. Shorn off unnecessary facts of the case are as under :
6. Pursuant to Section 29-A of the Representation of People Act, 1953 [hereinafter referred to as the “Act”], the petitioner-Natik Party applied for registration to the Election Commission of India [hereinafter referred to as the “Commission”]. vide letter dated 3.2.2010, the Commission, while exercising the powers conferred under Section 29-A of the Act, registered the petitioner as a political party. Since then, the petitioner is an unrecognized registered political party.
7. For contesting the General Election to the Legislative Assembly of Uttar Pradesh, 2012, the petitioner applied under the provision of Para 10-B of the Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order, 1968 [hereinafter referred to as the “Symbol Order”] for allotment of symbol to its candidates. This application was accepted by the Commission and election symbol “broom” was allotted to the petitioner for contesting all 403 Assembly Constituencies in the State of U.P. In the election of Legislative Assembly of Uttar Pradesh, 2012, since the petitioner-Natik Party could not secure the required percentage of vote for recognition as State Party, therefore, it was not recognized and remained as a registered unrecognized party. vide Notification No. 56/2013/PPS-II dated 10.7.2013, Para 10 B of the Symbol Order was amended by the Commission. On 9.12.2013, the petitioner requested the Commission to allot free symbol “broom” for the ensuing Lok Sabha Election, 2014.
8. According to the petitioner, on 10th July, 2013, without the consent of the petitioner, the Commission allotted “broom” as a symbol to the Aam Admi Party for contesting Delhi Legislative Assembly Election, 2013. In the said Delhi Legislative Assembly, result of election was declared, in which, Aam Aadmi Party succeeded to secure 28 seats in the Assembly and on 19.12.2013, the party was recognized as a State party for the State of Delhi and the symbol “broom” was reserved for the Aam Aadmi Party in the State of Delhi.
9. Mr. C.B. Pandey, Counsel for the petitioner submits that Para 9 of the Symbol Order provide that a symbol reserved for a State Party in any State shall not be included in the list of free symbols for any other State or Union Territory. Since symbol “broom” has now been reserved for Aam Aadmi Party in Delhi, it would not be excluded from the list of free symbols, therefore, neither in Uttar Pradesh nor in any other State, it would be allotted to the petitioner. Thus, the provision relating to exclusion of symbol reserved for a particular State from the list of free symbols is totally arbitrary, discriminatory and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
10. Mr. Pandey has further submits that Para 10 of the Symbol Order, which provide that the
