Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Sri J. Joseph Solomon, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the rejection of his nomination paper as an independent candidate for the Bangalore Central Parliamentary Constituency. The rejection was communicated via an internet/web extract (Annexure-F) dated 27.03.2014. The petitioner contended that the Returning Officer had not provided any reasons for the rejection and that he was denied the opportunity to contest the election. The respondents, represented by the Chief Election Commissioner and the Returning Officer, argued that the proper remedy for challenging the rejection of a nomination is by way of an election petition under the Representation of the People Act, 1951, and not a writ petition under Article 226. They relied on the Supreme Court ruling in Manda Jaganath v. K.S. Rathnam and Others, (2004) 7 SCC 492, which held that Article 329(b) of the Constitution prohibits any challenge to an election except by an election petition. The court, after hearing both sides, agreed with the respondents' submission and held that the writ petition was not maintainable. The court dismissed the petition, leaving the petitioner to pursue the remedy of an election petition if he so desired.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Election Law - Maintainability of Writ Petition - Article 329(b) of the Constitution of India - The petitioner challenged the rejection of his nomination paper as an independent candidate for the Bangalore Central Parliamentary Constituency by filing a writ petition under Article 226. The court held that Article 329(b) of the Constitution prohibits any challenge to an election except by an election petition presented to the appropriate authority. Therefore, the writ petition was not maintainable and was dismissed. (Paras 1-7) B) Constitutional Law - Election Law - Remedy for Rejection of Nomination - Representation of the People Act, 1951, Section 80 - The court held that the proper remedy for a candidate whose nomination has been rejected is to file an election petition under the Representation of the People Act, 1951, and not a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. (Paras 5-7)
Issue of Consideration
Whether a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is maintainable to challenge the rejection of a nomination paper for an election to the House of the People.
Final Decision
The writ petition is dismissed. The petitioner is at liberty to file an election petition if he so desires.
Law Points
- Article 329(b) of the Constitution of India bars challenge to election except by election petition
- Writ jurisdiction under Article 226 not available for rejection of nomination
- Election petition is the proper remedy
