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

2023 Supreme(Online)(Del) 18980

DELHI HIGH COURT
MUKTA SHARMA – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. – Respondent
WP(C)-16258_2023



The Returning Officer should issue a composite notification for all the posts and not in piecemeal manner. The Returning Officer should not confine the nominations to reserved seats but issue a composite Notification for all the posts, so that there is a fair opportunity to all the contestants including women / SC / ST candidates to take a considered decision as against which post, they need to contest.

Headnote:

ELECTION - COOPERATIVE SOCIETY - NOTIFICATION - [The court held that the Returning Officer should have issued a composite notification for all the 15 posts and not in piecemeal manner of 12+3 posts. The court also held that the Returning Officer, instead of confining the nominations to 3 seats for women / SC / ST, should have issued a composite Notification for all 15 posts, so that there is a fair opportunity to all the contestants including women / SC / ST candidates to take a considered decision as against which post, they need to contest.]

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner, a member of the Supreme Court Bar Association Multi-State Cooperative Group Housing Society Limited (respondent No.4), filed a writ petition challenging the issuance of two separate notifications by the Returning Officer for the election of 15 directors of the Society. The initial notification, issued on November 23, 2023, did not specify the number of posts for which the election would be held. The Revised Election Programme, issued on December 14, 2023, called for nominations for three reserved seats for women and SC/ST candidates.

Finding of the Court:

The court held that the Returning Officer should have issued a composite notification for all the 15 posts and not in piecemeal manner of 12+3 posts. The court also held that the Returning Officer, instead of confining the nominations to 3 seats for women / SC / ST, should have issued a composite Notification for all 15 posts, so that there is a fair opportunity to all the contestants including women / SC / ST candidates to take a considered decision as against which post, they need to contest.

Issues: 1. Whether the Returning Officer should have issued a composite notification for all the 15 posts or in piecemeal manner?2. Whether the Returning Officer should have confined the nominations to 3 seats for women / SC / ST or issued a composite Notification for all 15 posts?

Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the judgment of the Supreme Court in Union Territory of Ladakh and Others v. Jammu and Kashmir National Conference and Another 2023 SCC OnLine SC 1140, wherein the Supreme Court held that the Constitutional Courts are required, nay they are duty-bound, to step in where issues crop up, indicating unjust executive action or an attempt to disturb a level-playing field between candidates and/or political parties with no justifiable or intelligible basis.

Final Decision: The court disposed of the writ petition and all pending applications, with no costs. The court directed the Returning Officer to issue a fresh Notification / Programme with regard to 15 posts including the reserved posts for women / SC / ST within one week from the date of the order, by saving 44 nominations which have already been finalized received in terms of the earlier notification, by giving those candidates a right to withdraw their nomination and then proceed to hold elections in accordance with law thereafter.

*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

%

+

W.P.(C) 16258/2023, CM APPLs. 65412/2023 & 66888/2023

MUKTA SHARMA

..... Petitioner

Through:

Mr. Vinay Kumar Garg, Sr. Adv. with

Mr. B.S. Rajesh, Mr. Arun Mishra,

Mr. J.K. Chawla, Mr. Vaibhav Vats,

Mr. Karandeep, Ms. Priya Nagar,

Mr. Siddhant Goswami, Advs. with

petitioner in person.

versus

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

..... Respondents

Through:

Mr. Chetan Sharma, ASG with

Ms. Manisha Agrawal Narain, CGSC

with Mr. Sandeep Singh Somaria,

Ms. Shivangi Gumber, Advs. with

Mr. Vinay Kumar Jindal, ARO/SDM

for R-1 to R-3

Ms. Kumud Lata Das, Adv. for

Mr. Deepak Tyagi, intervener.

Mr. Vibhu Shankar Mishra, and

Ms. Mannu Singh, Advs. for

candidate of the Election.

Dr. Adish C. Aggarwala, Sr. Adv. /

President of SCBA with Ms. Sangita

Malhotra, Adv.

Ms. Preeti Chauhan, ACEO for

R-4/SCBAMSCGHS Ltd.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA

Digitally Signed

By:DHARMENDER SINGH

Signing Date:23.12.2023

15:34:43

Signature Not Verified

V. KAMESWAR RAO, J. (ORAL)

CM APPL. 66888/2023 (for impleadment)

For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed.

The applicant is impleaded as a party respondent.

The application is disposed of.

W.P.(C) 16258/2023

1.

This petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following

prayers:-

2.

On December 18, 2023, this Court had passed the following

order:-

“1.

Digitally Signed

By:DHARMENDER SINGH

Signing Date:23.12.2023

15:34:43

Signature Not Verified

Digitally Signed

By:DHARMENDER SINGH

Signing Date:23.12.2023

15:34:43

Signature Not Verified

said posts.”

3.

Mr. Vinay Garg, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the

petitioner states that the initial notification issued on November 23,

2023, by the Assistant Registrar (Cooperation) notifying the schedule

for election of the Supreme Court Bar Association Multi-State

Cooperative Group Housing Society Limited i.e. respondent No.4

contemplates the appointment to the 15 posts of Director of the Society.

Digitally Signed

By:DHARMENDER SINGH

Signing Date:23.12.2023

15:34:43

Signature Not Verified

4.

He also submits that a circular dated December 12, 2023 was

issued by the ARO / SDM, Vasant Vihar on behalf of Returning

Officer, wherein, in paragraphs 1 and 2, the following has been stated:-

members of the board of directors.

5.

Thereafter, an order dated December 14, 2023 was issued by

the ARO, which reads as under:-

ORDER

Digitally Signed

By:DHARMENDER SINGH

Signing Date:23.12.2023

15:34:43

Signature Not Verified

6.

He also draws our attention to ‘Revised Election Programme

issued by the Returning Officer only to the extent of calling for

nomination for reserving the seats for women (2) and SC/ST (1) with

Digitally Signed

By:DHARMENDER SINGH

Signing Date:23.12.2023

15:34:43

Signature Not Verified

date of nomination to be submitted between December 18, 2023 to

December 23, 2023 and with date of election as January 04, 2024.

7.

The submission of Mr. Vinay Garg, primarily, as noted in the

order dated December 18, 2023, is that vide 'Revised Election Program',

the Returning Officer has sought the nomination for two reserved seats

for women and one for SC/ST category, resulting in the earlier

notification issued on November 23, 2023 to mean that the same shall

now be confined to 12 posts of Director. He submits that the Returning

Officer should have issued a composite notification for all the 15 posts

and not in piecemeal manner of 12+3 posts. He also submits that the

chances of the petitioner, if at all, she intends to participate in the

elections, shall get prejudiced. If all the women, who submitted

nomination against 15 posts, indicate their option for reserved seats,

then the same shall reduce the chances of success:-

REVISED ELECTION PROGRAM

(SCBA MSCGHS Ltd.) is given below. The Conference

Hall, Disaster Management Cen

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