Delhi High Court Rejects Plea Against JDU's Internal Elections Electing Nitish Kumar As President

The Delhi High Court has dismissed a plea challenging the internal party elections held by Janata Dal United (JDU) in 2016 electing Nitish Kumar as President of the political party.

Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav rejected the plea moved by JDU's expelled member, Govind Yadav, who challenged the internal party elections conducted in 2016, 2019 and 2022 on the ground that they were in breach of the party's constitution.

He was aggrieved by the changes notified by JDU to the ECI regarding amendments in its list of office bearers through a series of correspondences from 2016 to 2021. It was his case that the changes were made in violation of Section 29(A)(9) of the Representation of Peoples Act.

He challenged the election of Nitish Kunar by the forum of National Executive, subsequent ratification and the letter submitted by JDU to the ECI in 2016.

He argued that the scheduled internal party elections were overridden by fresh notices and rival members were declared as party office bearers using emergency provisions of the party's constitution.

He submitted that all subsequent appointments following the election of Nitish Kumar as JDU President were made in contravention of the party's constitution and were orchestrated to advance certain vested interests.

Rejecting the plea, Justice Kaurav said that the petition lacked merit and fell outside the jurisdictional scope of Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

The court observed that the dispute at hand was initially raised by one faction of JDU under the Symbols Order and an interim order was passed in 2017 deciding in favour of the faction led by Nitish Kumar.

“The Court has noted that the final order dated 25.11.2017 from the ECI recognized Mr. Nitish Kumar as the party president and his faction as the legitimate State party in Bihar. As such, the letter dated 20.09.2017, issued by the rival faction that lost its claim under the Symbols Order, cannot be given credence,” the court said.

It added that the nature of the reliefs sought in the writ petition fell wholly outside the ambit of the inquiry contemplated under Section 29A of the RP Act.

“In light of the foregoing discussion, the Court finds no compelling reason to interfere in the present writ petition or to grant the relief sought by the petitioner. The petition lacks merit and falls outside the jurisdictional scope of Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Consequently, the writ petition is hereby dismissed along with pending application(s),” the court said.

Counsel for Petitioner: Mr. Pathak Rakesh Kaushik, Advocate

Counsel for Respondents: Mr. Sidhant Kumar and Mr. Om Batra, Advocates

Title: GOVIND YADAV v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 953

Click Here To Read Order