Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(UK) 1880
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
G. Narendar, CJ, Alok Mahra, J
Akash Bora – Appellant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and Others – Respondent
Public Interest Litigation No. 131 of 2025
For the Appellant: Tajhar Qayyum
For the Respondent: J.C. Pande, Sanjay Bhatt
Electoral integrity must be maintained through proper inquiry mechanisms, enabling grievances to be addressed via Election Tribunal.
Headnote:(A) Uttarakhand Panchayat Raj Act, 2016 - Sections 9 and 9(10) - Writ Petition for inquiry into voter eligibility - Petition filed praying for the establishment of an independent committee to investigate alleged fraudulent electoral entries, with action taken by State Election Commission - Petitioner permitted to pursue remedy via Election Tribunal - Implicates participation and removal of names from electoral rolls. (Paras 2, 6, 7)
(B) Committee Inquiry - Election integrity - Allegations of voter fraud necessitated an independent inquiry into voting eligibility, with findings determining preparedness for upcoming elections. (Paras 1, 4)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner sought judicial direction for an inquiry into alleged fraudulent voter enrollment ahead of Panchayat elections, asserting illegal entries were made into the electoral roll.
Findings of Court:
Action initiated by the State Election Commission, affirming procedural compliance and the opportunity for electoral grievance resolution through tribunal means.
Issues: The core inquiry was into the legitimacy of the inclusion of certain fraudulent voter entries.
Ratio Decidendi: The court noted that the petitioner’s grievances regarding the electoral process can be entertained through an Election Petition at the proper tribunal; thus, it dismissed the writ petition.
Result: Writ petition stands disposed of.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. state election commission's actions and compliance. (Para 3 , 5) |
| 2. inquiry into fraudulent voter entries. (Para 4) |
| 3. procedural options and rights of the petitioner. (Para 6) |
| 4. resolution through election tribunal. (Para 7) |
| 5. writ disposed. (Para 8) |
JUDGMENT :(per Mr. G. Narendar C. J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the State Election Commission.
2. The instant writ petition is preferred praying for the following reliefs:
“1. Direct an impartial and independent committee to conduct a fair inquiry, before 24.07.2025, into the role of Respondent Nos. 5, 6 and 7 (VDO, BLO, and Respondent No.7) in making fraudulent entries using fabricated documents, and into the involvement and eligibility of the 52 individuals to vote in the upcoming Panchayat election of the 52 individuals to vote in the upcoming Panchayat elections of Gram Panchayat Dudhlakot whose names were allegedly included illegally in the voter list.
2. Order to allow voting of these 52 individuals in the upcoming elections of gram panchayat Budhlakot if it is found by the independent committee that they are eligible to vote as per Uttarakhand Panchayat Raj Act and Constitution of India.
3. Issue a writ of mandamus directing the Respondents to delete the 52 fraudulently included names from the voter list of Gram Sabha Budhlakot after due enquiry and providing them opportunity of hearing in accordance with the provisions of the Uttarakhand Panchayati Raj Act , 2016.”
3. Learned Standing Counsel for the State Election Commission submits that, pursuant to the filing of the writ petition, action has been initiated and the Village Development Officer has been placed under suspension, and the names of such individuals, who were found not ordinarily residing in the Village, have also been deleted from the electoral roll.
4. Per contra, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that some of the persons, whose names have been pointed out by the petitioner in the petition and arrayed as respondents, have already cast their votesin the elections that were held on 24.07.2025.
5. The Chief Secretary has filed compliance affidavit placing on record the stand of the State Government and the relevant portions of the affidavit reads as under:
“4. That in accordance with Section 9 of the Uttarakhand Panchayati Raj Act , 2016, the electoral roll for each constituency of the Gram Panchayat shall be prepared under the superintendence, direction and control of the State Election Commission. Further as per Section 9 (10), if the Act and Rules do not provide for a matter concerning electoral roll, then the State Election Commission may, by order, make provisions in respect of the same.
5. Accordingly, the State Election Commission vide notification no.1015 dated 05.10.2024, issued direction for a detailed revision of the Panchayat Electoral rolls of all the districts of Uttarakhand (except Haridwar district), as per the provisions of the Uttar Pradesh Panchayati Raj (Electoral Registration) Rules, 1994. In this connection, copy of the notification dated 05.10.2024 issued by the State Election Commission is being marked and annexed as (Annexure No.1) to the affidavit.
6. That it is respectfully submitted that for the purpose of revising or preparing the electoral roll of a constituency, reliance is to be placed upon the provisions of the Uttar Pradesh Panchayati Raj (Electoral Registration) Rules, 1994.
7. Therefore, the State Government of Uttarakhand, has no role to play in so far as the preparation of Electoral Roll is concerned.”
6. If the petitioner is of the view that the elections are vitiated, it is always open for the petitioner to avail the remedy of filing an Election Petition and the Election Tribunal, being the competent authority, shall examine the issue, in accordance with law.
7. In view of the submissions made by the learned Standing Counsel for the State Election Commission that action has already been initiated, we a
