Case Note & Summary
The dispute arose out of doubts regarding the propriety of holding the Presidential election before the completion of general elections throughout India. Two petitioners filed separate petitions before the Supreme Court under Article 71(1) of the Constitution, invoking the Court's jurisdiction to inquire into and decide doubts and disputes arising out of or in connection with the election of the President. They sought an order restraining the Election Commission from taking the poll for the Presidential election fixed for May 6, 1957, until the pending general elections in the Union territory of Himachal Pradesh and in two Lok Sabha constituencies of Punjab were completed. The first petitioner, Narayan Bhaskar Khare, alleged that he was an intending candidate for the Presidential election and that the time between receiving his nomination paper on April 10, 1957 and the last date for filing nomination on April 16, 1957 was too short to enable him to file within time. The second petitioner, a candidate contesting the Lok Sabha election from Kangra constituency in Punjab whose polling had been postponed to June 2, 1957, contended that holding the Presidential election on May 6, 1957 would deprive him of his right to vote for the President and also alleged discrimination under Article 14 of the Constitution. The material facts were undisputed. After the general elections in all States and Union territories except Himachal Pradesh and two constituencies in Punjab, the old Lok Sabha was dissolved on April 4, 1957 and the new Lok Sabha was constituted on April 5, 1957 under Section 73 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. The Election Commission issued a notification under Section 4 of the Presidential and Vice-Presidential Election Act, 1952 setting out the election schedule with nominations by April 16, scrutiny on April 17, withdrawal by April 20, polling on May 6, and counting on May 10, 1957. The term of the then President was due to expire at midnight on May 12, 1957, and Article 62(1) required that the election to fill the vacancy be completed before expiration of the term. The petitioners argued that the electoral college must be constituted only after all States and Union territories had completed elections, and that a grave doubt existed which the Supreme Court was bound to decide regardless of its merits. The respondents, represented by the Attorney-General, contended that the petitions were premature because the Supreme Court's jurisdiction under Article 71(1) could be exercised only after a candidate had been declared elected and an election petition filed under Section 14 of the Presidential and Vice-Presidential Election Act, 1952. The Court examined Articles 71, 324, 327 and 329 of the Constitution and the scheme of election dispute resolution under the Representation of the People Act, 1951. It noted that identical words 'doubts and disputes arising out of or in connection with elections' appeared in Article 71(1) and that Parliament had prescribed a special forum and manner for challenging elections. Relying on N.P. Ponnuswami v. Returning Officer, Namakkal Constituency, the Court held that the word 'election' in Article 71 was used in the wider sense to denote the entire process of election culminating in a candidate being declared elected, but that the jurisdiction to decide doubts and disputes could be exercised only after such declaration and on an election petition filed under Section 14 of the 1952 Act. It further held that Article 62(1) was mandatory and that an election cannot be held up to facilitate individual grievances in derogation of the interest of the people in general. The Court did not express any opinion on the merits of the contentions regarding the composition of the electoral college. Accordingly, both petitions were dismissed as premature.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Presidential Election Disputes - Article 71(1) Constitution of India - Supreme Court jurisdiction to inquire into doubts and disputes arising out of or in connection with election of President or Vice-President can be exercised only after a particular candidate has been declared elected and on an election petition filed under Section 14 of the Presidential and Vice-Presidential Election Act, 1952 - Petitioners invoked Article 71(1) seeking stay of polling fixed for May 6, 1957, alleging grave doubts about incomplete electoral college and insufficient time to file nomination - Court held that the jurisdiction is not exercisable at an intermediate stage before declaration, and the petitions were premature and dismissed - Held that the Court cannot entertain doubts at pre-election stage. (Paras Not mentioned) B) Constitutional Law - Mandatory Provision for Presidential Election - Article 62(1) Constitution of India - Election to fill vacancy caused by expiration of President's term must be completed before expiration of term - The provision is peremptory and mandatory, conceived in interest of the people in general, and election cannot be held up to facilitate individual grievances in derogation of that interest - Election Commission's time schedule fixing polling before expiry of President's term on May 12, 1957 was consistent with this mandatory requirement - Held that Article 62 is mandatory in character. (Paras Not mentioned) C) Election Law - Interpretation of 'Election' - Article 71 and Article 329(b) read with Representation of the People Act, 1951 - The word 'election' denotes the entire process of election culminating in a candidate being declared elected, and doubts and disputes arising out of or in connection with such election include all doubts and disputes relating to any particular stage - Special forums and procedures prescribed by Parliament must be followed, and an election can be called in question only by election petition presented in manner provided by law - Applying N.P. Ponnuswami v. Returning Officer, Namakkal Constituency, the Court reasoned that identical principles apply to Presidential elections - Held that the word 'election' is used in the wider sense. (Paras Not mentioned) D) Constitutional Law - Right to Vote and Electoral College - Articles 54, 56 and 14 Constitution of India - Composition of electoral college and timing of Presidential election - Petitioners contended that electoral college must be constituted only after all general elections are completed, and that first petitioner had insufficient time to file nomination while second petitioner would be deprived of right to vote - Court did not express any opinion on the merits of these contentions because the petitions were disposed of on the narrower preliminary ground of prematurity - Held that it was unnecessary to decide merits of contentions regarding electoral college. (Paras Not mentioned)
Issue of Consideration
Whether Supreme Court can exercise jurisdiction under Article 71(1) of the Constitution to inquire into doubts and disputes relating to Presidential election before a candidate has been declared elected and before an election petition is filed under Section 14 of the Presidential and Vice-Presidential Election Act, 1952; whether Article 62(1) mandates completion of Presidential election before expiration of President's term; and whether petitions filed before polling are premature.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court dismissed both petitions as premature. It held that the jurisdiction and power conferred on the Supreme Court by Article 71(1) of the Constitution to inquire into and decide doubts and disputes arising out of or in connection with the election of the President can be exercised only after a particular candidate has been declared elected and on an election petition filed under Section 14 of the Presidential and Vice-Presidential Election Act, 1952. The Court held that the word 'election' in Article 71 is used in the wider sense to denote the entire process of election culminating in a candidate being declared elected, but that it did not need to express any opinion on the merits of the contentions regarding the composition of the electoral college because the petitions were disposed of on a narrower preliminary ground.
Law Points
- Legal points not extracted
- Article 71(1) jurisdiction exercisable only after candidate declared elected and election petition filed under Section 14 of Presidential and Vice-Presidential Election Act
- 1952
- word 'election' in Article 71 covers entire process culminating in declaration of result
- Article 62(1) is mandatory and requires completion of Presidential election before expiration of term
- election cannot be held up for individual grievances
- special forums and procedures prescribed by Parliament must be followed
- principles in N.P. Ponnuswami v. Returning Officer apply to Presidential election disputes
