State Election Commission Cannot Cancel Pending Election, Any Irregularity Can Be Decided Only By Tribunal: Punjab & Haryana High Court

The Punjab & Haryana High Court has said the State Election Commission cannot cancel pending elections and any irregularities alleged during the progress of the election process can be adjudicated only by the Tribunal.

The observation was made while quashing the order passed by Punjab Election Commission to cancel Panchayat Election for village Chak Haraj of Punjab's Ferozepur District.

Justice Sureshwar Thakur and Justice Sudeepti Sharma said, "the State Election Commission has ill assumed the jurisdiction respectively of the State Government as invested under Sections 11 and 12 of the Act of 1994 besides has also ill assumed the jurisdiction over the dispute(s), jurisdiction whereof otherwise became well invested only in the Election Tribunal concerned."

The plea was filed by Simranpreet Kaur alleging that the Panchayat election in Punjab's village Chak Haraj was arbitrarily cancelled. Kaur was the only candidate left for the post of Sarpanch after the nomination of others was cancelled. 

The candidates for the post of Panch and Sarpanch had approached the State Election Commission that their nomination papers were maliciously cancelled by the Returning Officer, hence the Election should be stayed.

Consequently, the State Election Commission cancelled the election which was scheduled on October 15.

Kaur contended that there is a complete bar in exercising the jurisdiction of the State Election Commission when the election is already scheduled. Hence, she should be declared as Sarpanch being an unopposed candidate.

After hearing the submissions, the Court referred to Section 89 of the Punjab State Election Commission Act, 1994, and opined that the election can be declared void only by the Election Tribunal subject to the provisions laid down under Section 89 (2).

The Court noted that under Section 89 (2) (c) the election can be declared void only by the Tribunal if the nomination paper is rejected improperly.  

"Resultantly, when after the rejection of the nomination papers of the respondents concerned, by the Returning Officer concerned, since the present petitioner was the singular candidate left in the fray, therebys she became purportedly entitled to become declared elected as unopposed," added the bench.

It further explained that the election could have been challenged only after it was conducted by filing the election petition and the State Election Commission lacked jurisdiction on the issue.

Reliance was placed on N.P. Ponnuswami v. The Returning Officer, Namakkal Constituency and others, [1952 SCC Online (SC) 3], to underscore that "the scheme the election law in this country as well as in England is that no significance should be attached to anything which does not affect the "election"; and if any irregularities are committed while it is in progress and they belong to the category or class which, under the law by which elections are governed, would have the effect of vitiating the' 'election" and enable the person affected to call it in question, they should be brought up before a special tribunal by means of an election petition and not be made the subject of a dispute before any court while the election is in progress.”

In light of the above, the Court set aside the order passed by the State Election Commission and directed to declare Kaur elected unopposed Sarpanch of the village.

Mr.ManjinderSinghBhullar,Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Maninder Singh, Sr. DAG, Punjab.

Title: Simarpreet Kaur v. State of Punjab and others

Click here to read/download the order