The Election Commission lacks jurisdiction to adjudicate disputes arising from internal elections of political parties, which are to be settled within the party framework under its own constitution.

JUDGMENT

The seminal questions which stand posed in the instant petition relate to the scope and extent of inquiry into the authenticity of the information concerning internal changes (office bearers etc.) in a political party, mandated to be furnished to the Election Commission of India (hereinafter referred to as “ECI”) under Section 29A (9) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as “RP Act”) and justiciability of the disputes arising from internal elections for the selection of office bearers within registered political parties in India.

2. The facts of the case at hand are that the petitioner is an expelled member of Janata Dal United (hereinafter referred to as “JDU”), which is a recognized State political party under the provisions of the Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order, 1968 (hereinafter referred to as “Symbols Order”). In compliance with the provisions of Section 29A (9) of the RP Act, JDU is purported to have notified the ECI regarding amendments in its list of office bearers through a series of correspondences dated 10.11.2016, 13.11.2019, 18.02.2021, 03.08.2021 and 27.09.2021, among others.

3. The petitioner seeks directions to annul these changes, incorporated in the record of the political parties maintained by the ECI, for being made in violation of Section 29(A)(9) of the RP Act. Additionally, the petitioner seeks a declaration from this Court that the internal party elections conducted by JDU in the years 2016, 2019, and 2022 were in breach of the party’s constitution. The petitioner also seeks various other interconnected directions, all of which have a bearing on the principal issue at hand, as outlined hereinbefore.

4. According to the petitioner, he was one of the founding members of the Janata Dal political party and played a significant role in its formation. Subsequently, he contested the General Elections from the Jabalpur parliamentary constituency in Madhya Pradesh on a Janata Dal ticket. The petitioner asserts a long-standing political career, highlighting his appointment as National Secretary of the Janata Dal (Youth Wing) in 1997. He further claims to have been elevated to the position of National General Secretary of Janata Dal (Youth Wing) in 2001. In 2003, he was appointed National President of the JDU (Youth Wing), a position he held again in 2006. In 2010, he was elected as State President of the JDU for the Madhya Pradesh Unit. The petitioner asserts that he has occupied various significant roles within Janata Dal and subsequently, within JDU.

5. The grievance of the petitioner emanates from a communication dated 11.04.2016, whereby, the ECI was informed that Mr. Nitish Kumar has been elected as the president of JDU through an organizational election held under the JDU constitution. The petitioner contends that the purported election of Mr. Nitish Kumar as president of JDU took place on 10.04.2016 vide the forum of National Executive. He submits that even though the election before the National Executive dated 10.04.2016 was disputed, the National Council, vide its decision dated 23.04.2016, ratified the alleged election of respondent no.3. He avers that such ratification is against the party’s constitution and in violation of internal democracy of the political party. He draws the attention of this Court towards a letter dated 25.04.2016, wherein, the aforementioned election of Mr. Nitish Kumar was informed to the ECI. The petitioner, therefore, challenges the election of respondent no.3 by the National Executive, subsequent ratifi