The disclosure of caste and religion in nomination papers is not a violation of the concept of secularism, but rather a statutory requirement under Section 33(2) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.

Headnote:
ELECTION PETITION - MAINTAINABILITY - IMPROPER ACCEPTANCE OF NOMINATION - DISCLOSURE OF CASTE AND RELIGION IN NOMINATION - SECULARISM - REPRESENTATION OF THE PEOPLE ACT, 1951 - SECTIONS 80, 81, 83, 84, 100
Fact of the Case:

The petitioner challenged the election of the returned candidate on the ground of improper acceptance of nomination. The petitioner alleged that the returned candidate and other respondents, who belong to various political parties, had improperly disclosed their caste and religion in their nomination papers, thereby violating the concept of secularism to be followed by political parties registered under the Representation of the People Act, 1951.
Finding of the Court:

The court held that the disclosure of caste and religion in the nomination papers was not a violation of the concept of secularism, but rather a statutory requirement under Section 33(2) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. The court further held that the petitioner had failed to establish any cause of action or arguable case to maintain an election petition, and dismissed the petition with costs.
Issues: Whether the disclosure of caste and religion in nomination papers violates the concept of secularism to be followed by political parties registered under the Representation of the People Act, 1951.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the Supreme Court's decision in Abhiram Singh v. C.D.Commachen (dead) by Lrs. And others [Civil Appeal No.37 of 1992 dated 2.1.2017], which held that political parties must maintain secularism and not mix religion and State power. However, the court distinguished this case from the present case, holding that the disclosure of caste and religion in nomination papers was not a violation of secularism, but rather a statutory requirement under Section 33(2) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the election petition with costs.

JUDGMENT

The maintainability of the election petition came up as a preliminary issue.

2. Heard both sides on the question of maintainability of the election petition.

3. Petitioner came up under Sections 80,81,83,84 and

100 of the Representation of People Act, 1951 challenging the election conducted in 084 Kunnathunadu Scheduled Caste Reserved Constituency in Kerala State Legislative Assembly Election held in the year 2021 on the ground of improper acceptance of nomination of the returned candidate/first respondent and other respondents and for a declaration that he is the returned candidate. It is submitted that respondent Nos. 1 to 7 belong to various political parties registered under the Representation of the People Act,1951. Admittedly, the constituency 084 Kunnathunadu is a reserved constituency for scheduled castes. The sum and substance of the allegation is that the nomination papers submitted by the returned candidate, who is the first respondent and the other candidates, the remaining respondents, were improperly accepted by the Returning Officer, though there is declaration with respect to the caste and religion in which he/they belongs without adhering to the constitutional intention and the concept of secularism to be followed by all political parties registered under the Act. The Apex Court in Abhiram Singh v. C.D.Commachen (dead) by Lrs. And others [Civil Appeal No.37 of 1992 dated 2.1.2017] had considered the importance of maintaining secularism in political parties/organisations registered under the Act. Paragraph 310 of the said judgment is extracted below for reference:-

“310. If the Constitution requires the State to be secular in thought and action, the same requirement attaches to political parties as well. The Constitution does not recognise, it does not permit, mixing religion and State power. Both must be kept apart. That is the constitutional injunction. None can say otherwise so long as this Constitution governs this country. Introducing religion into politics is to introduce an impermissible element into body politic and an imbalance in our constitutional system. If a political party espousing a particular religion comes to power, that religion tends to become, in practice, the official religion. All other religions come to acquire a secondary status, at any rate, a less favourable position. This would be plainly antithetical to Articles 14 to 16,25 and the entire constitutional scheme adumbrated hereinabove. Under our Constitution, no party or Organisation can simultaneously be a political and a religious party.”

4. The legal position so settled is taken as a ground of attack against the nomination submitted by the returned candidate- the first respondent on the reason that since he belongs to a particular political party following the concept of secularism, is not expected to disclose his religious identity in the nomination though there is a specific column for making a declaration with respect to his eligibility to contest in a particular constituency reserved for Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes. What is settled by the Apex Court in the above said decision is the importance of maintaining secular concepts by political parties/organisations registered under Section 29A of the Representation of the People Act,1951. The political party or organisation so registered under Section 29A of the Act will have its own legal entity apart from the candidates who were contested or elected. It is by virtue of Article 332 of the Constitution of India certain constituencies are reserved exclusively for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and it is a constitutional mandate. Necessarily those who want to contest in that constituency reserved either for Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes should make a declaration as required in the nomination disclosing his/her eligibility to contest in that particular constituency by specifying the religion and the caste in accordance with the mandate under Section 33(2) of

Click Here to Read the rest of this document