Amend Rules To Ensure Speedy Disposal Of Election Petitions: Madras HC Tells State [Read Order]

‘Ensure complete and comprehensive adjudication of Election Dispute assigned to the designated concerned judge/tribunal within the prescribed time.’

The Madras High Court has called upon the state to make an endeavour to bring necessary amendments so as to see that election petitions/disputes are determined expeditiously.

Justice M Venugopal was considering an election petition by Saidai Sa Duraisamy when it observed that Rules of the Madras High Court Election Petitions, 1967, were silent as to the conclusion of the trial of every election petition within six months from the date on which the said election petition is presented to the high court for 'conduct of trial'.

The court dismissed Duraisamy’s plea and said: “A mere 'Hope of Votes' to be polled in favour of the Petitioner cannot form a cementing platform for rendering the election of Returned Candidate be declared void.”

With regard to the need of bringing in a new amendment to ensure that election petitions are disposed of expeditiously, the bench observed: “The ingredients of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, will become a more effective and efficacious one [rather than to remain as a Black Letter Law] with a view to achieve the desired Aim and Purpose of the Act, 1951, in regard to the complete and comprehensive adjudication of Election Dispute assigned to the concerned designated Judge/Tribunal within the prescribed time, of course, bearing in mind that this type of litigation occurs once in a Blue Moon [thereby rudimentarily not to give room for elongating or precipitating or procrastinating the Election Petition proceedings beyond the specified period under the Representation of People Act, 1951, so as to hang like a 'Damocles sword' and reminding one that an 'Homo Sapien Litigant' is Mortal and 'Litigation' is Immortal in our Processual System of Jurisprudence].”

The court said listing the election petition in regard to the conduct of trial once in a week is not a palatable one, since the same will not achieve the desired objective of the ingredient of Section 86(6) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.

Read the Order here.