Case Note & Summary
The Supreme Court dealt with a writ petition filed by Bhim Singh, President of the Jammu & Kashmir Panthers Party, challenging the constitutionality of Section 30(d) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 and seeking a direction to the Election Commission of India to issue a separate notification for holding Lok Sabha elections in Jammu & Kashmir within twenty days of withdrawal of nominations. The petitioner contended that Section 30(d) conferred unbridled, unguided and uncontrolled power on the Election Commission to fix poll dates without any terminal date, leading to an extended canvassing period of up to fifty-five days in certain constituencies, which imposed severe security and financial burdens on candidates. The Union of India filed a counter affidavit supporting the petitioner, highlighting security threats from militant outfits, the cost of providing security for long periods, and suggesting that the period for canvassing be limited to the minimum statutory period. The Election Commission relied on material on record and argued that its decision had been taken after considering all relevant factors, including deployment of security forces, and that it had the power under Section 153 to revise the schedule. On 3 April 1996, the Court directed the Union of India and the Election Commission to hold fresh discussions. The next day, a joint statement was presented stating that the polls would be held as originally announced on 7, 23 and 30 May 1996, and that since notifications under Sections 14 and 30 had already been issued, the schedule could not be changed at that stage. The Court expressed surprise at the Union of India's change of stance but held that in light of the joint statement, its intervention was uncalled for. The Court reiterated that Article 324 vests the conduct of elections in the Election Commission and emphasized that election functionaries must adopt a realistic, pragmatic and flexible approach to ensure free and fair elections. The writ petition was disposed of without any direction, and the existing election schedule for Jammu and Kashmir was allowed to continue.
Headnote
A) Election Law - Appointment of Dates for Nominations - Discretion of Election Commission under Section 30(d) - Representation of the People Act, 1951, Section 30(d) - The petitioner challenged Section 30(d) as conferring unbridled, unguided and uncontrolled power to fix poll dates without terminal date, violating Article 14. The Court was not impressed by the constitutionality challenge and observed that Section 30(d) read with Section 153 and Article 324 vests discretion in the Election Commission to conduct elections. Held that no unconstitutionality is made out. B) Election Law - Rescheduling of Polls - Joint Statement of Union and Election Commission - Representation of the People Act, 1951, Sections 14, 30, 153 - The Court was concerned about security risks from extended canvassing period in Jammu and Kashmir and directed fresh discussions. After Union and Election Commission agreed that notifications had already been issued and schedule could not be changed, the Court held its intervention uncalled for and declined to direct preponing of poll dates. Held that the existing schedule continues. C) Constitutional Law - Power of Election Commission - Free and Fair Elections - Constitution of India, Article 324 - The Court emphasized that functionaries concerned with conduct of elections must adopt realistic, pragmatic and flexible approach to ensure free, fair and peaceful elections in democratic framework. Held that conduct of elections is vested in Election Commission under Article 324.
Issue of Consideration
Whether Section 30(d) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 is unconstitutional and ultra vires Article 14 of the Constitution of India as it does not specify maximum period for holding election after withdrawal of nominations; Whether a direction should be issued to Election Commission of India to issue separate notification under Section 30(d) read with Section 153 for holding elections in Jammu & Kashmir within 20 days from date of withdrawal of nominations.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court, in light of the joint statement of the Union of India and the Election Commission that the existing election schedule for Jammu and Kashmir (polls on 7th, 23rd and 30th May 1996) must continue because notifications under Sections 14 and 30 had been issued, held that its intervention was uncalled for. The writ petition was disposed of without any direction, and the existing schedule was allowed to stand, with observations emphasizing the need for a realistic, pragmatic and flexible approach to free and fair elections.
Law Points
- Section 30(d) of Representation of the People Act
- 1951 confers discretion on Election Commission to fix poll dates
- Article 324 vests conduct of elections in Election Commission
- Election Commission has power under Section 153 to revise schedule of polls
- Free and fair elections require realistic pragmatic and flexible approach
