Punjab & Haryana HC Declines Interim Relief To Bank Opposing Election Duty Of Its Employees, Says It's Imperative To Uphold Democracy

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has refused to grant interim relief to a cooperative bank which has challenged Election Commission's order requiring its employee for election duty.

Justice Aman Chaudhary said,

"Engaging in election duty is akin to fulfilling a solemn duty that each citizen owes towards the nation, analogous to participating in a festival celebrating the democratic principles upon which our society is founded. Serving in election duties ensures the smooth functioning of the electoral process, safeguarding the fundamental right of every citizen to choose their representatives."

"Just as legal documents serve as pillars of order and justice, so does participation in election duty uphold the rule of law and the sanctity of democratic institutions. This duty being in national interest outweighs the personal," added the judge.

The Court was hearing a batch of petitions relating to the requirement of staff of the Cooperative Banks by the Election Commission of India for the purpose of performing election duties in the ensuing Parliamentary Election.

After hearing the submissions, the Court noted that the issue involved herein is subjudice before the Supreme Court. The judgment in Bhavnagar District Cooperative Bank Ltd. and another vs. State of Gujarat and others, upon which the petitioners had heavily relied, was also stayed.

"As such, this Court deems it appropriate to await the authoritative pronouncement thereof, but considering the urgency of the matter and the facts and circumstances of the present cases, is disposing of only the prayer for interim relief at this stage," said the Court.

The Court rejected the petitioner's contention that in case employees of the Cooperative Banks are deputed, their functioning will come to a screeching halt, there being paucity of staff in the branches.

 It was further argued that these cooperative banks are not owned, controlled, financed or managed by appropriate authority and thus not covered under Section 159 (2) of the Representation of Peoples of India Act, 1951.

However, the Court said that "primary grievance of paucity of staff and the functioning of the Bank getting disrupted has already been taken care of, by Election Commission of India, by substantially minimizing their deployment to the maximum possible extent, in strict adherence to the instructions and provisions of law..."

Justice Chaudhary also said that even if its taken that the petitioners have a prima facie case, yet the other two ingredients for interim relief are absent, as neither the balance of convenience leans in their favour nor there is any loss much less irreparable being caused to the employees,

The Court referred to CCE vs. Dunlop India Ltd., (1985) 1 SCC 260, to underscore that interim relief if allowed should not amount to granting the final relief.

While disposing of the "interim prayer", the Court directed to list the matter after the decision of the Supreme Court.

Title: The Bathinda Central Cooperative Bank Employees Union (Regd.), Bathinda vs. Election Commission of India and others

Iqbal Singh Saggu and Tejveer Singh Saggu, Advocates, for the petitioner(s) in CWP-4715, 5324, 6685, 7127 and 5331-2024

Mohit Sadana, Advocate, for the petitioner in CWP-7421-2024.

Prateek Gupta, Advocate, for respondent No.1-Election Commission of India.

Swapan Shorey, DAG, Punjab.

Ashwani Prashar, Advocate, for respondents in CWP No.7127-2024; and iCWP-6685 and 4715-2024.

Gaurav Goel, Advocate, for respondent No.5 in CWP-5324 and 7127-2024.

Sukhbeer Singh, Advocate, for respondent No.6 in CWP-5324-2024.

Click here to read/download the order