Fixing Of Ceiling Limit For Expenses Incurred By Candidates In Local Body Elections: High Court Of Madhya Pradesh Issues Notice

The petition was heard by Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Sunita Yadav 

The Petitioner, Nagrik Upbhokta Marg Darshak Manch, an association of local residents/social workers of Jabalpur City, was seeking a direction from the Court to be given to the state government to decide on its representation, wherein it was prayed that there be ceiling limits fixed for expenses to be incurred by candidates contesting in Panchayat elections, along the lines of the policy followed in Municipal elections conducted in the State of Madhya Pradesh.

According to the Petitioner, there is no expenditure limit for candidates in Panchayat elections, corollary to which, many of them indulge in exorbitant expenditure to woo and lure voters. Such practices, it submitted, vitiates the elections by jeopardizing its free and fair conduct that ultimately prevents a level playing field for all the candidates.

The petition has stated that there are largescale development projects being undertaken in the rural areas throughout the State of Madhya Pradesh for which the financial powers are vested in the office bearers of the Panchayat. Seeing these positions as rather means of social service, they are now considered to be lucrative opportunities to mint money. This has led to a deluge of unaccounted money in the Panchayat elections. Therefore, the petition submitted, it has become necessary to provide adequate provision in the existing law to fix the limits on the election expenses incurred by candidates contesting in Panchayat Elections.

The Petitioner has relied on the observations of the Supreme Court in Kanwar Lal Gupta v. Amar Nath Chawla to contend that financial superiority translates into electoral advantage, and so, richer candidates and parties have a greater chance of winning election. This scenario skews the electoral process in favour of the rich. It further pointed out the comments of the Apex court in Ashok Shankrrao Chavan v. Madhavrao Kinhalkar to assert that money buys voters and in the process, harms the chances of genuine and deserving candidates.

The Petitioner laid out the relevant statutory provisions that put a cap on the expenditure incurred by an electoral candidate in the State-

1. Section 76, 77 and 78 of the Representation of People's Act, 1951 for candidates contesting for the post of MP or MLA
2. Section 14A of the Municipal Corporation Act, 1956 for candidates contesting for the post of Mayor
3. The Election Expenses (Maintenance and Submission of Accounts) Amended Order 2014, under the Municipalities Act, 1961 for candidates contesting for the post of President of Municipal Council

The petition categorically submits and asserts that there is no such provision available, either under the Act of 1993 or Panchayat Election Rules 1995 framed thereunder, fixing the expenditure limit for the candidates contesting elections to the post under the Act of 1993.

The petition sheds light on Petitioner's prior litigation efforts to reign in the expenses incurred during elections. Similar to the matter at hand, the Petitioner had preferred a PIL vide W.P.- 4848/2019, wherein it had sought for an identical prayer, but with respect to fixing limit of expenses of candidates in Municipal elections. The High Court, vide order dated 15.04.2019 had directed the state government to consider and decide on the representation of the Petitioner. However, the state government did not implement the order, against which, the Petitioner preferred a contempt proceeding vide CON.C.- 1440/2019.

The state government in its reply to the contempt proceeding had brought on record a Gazette Notification dated 22.02.2020 whereby it had incorporated ceiling limit to the expenditure to be incurred by the candidates contesting the elections to the post of Councillors in Municipal Corporation and Municipalities in the State of Madhya Pradesh by suitably amending the Municipal Corporation Act, 1956 and M.P. Municipalities Act, 1961. The petition claimed that this had happened on account of the initiative it had undertaken.

Considering the upcoming elections, the Petitioner urged that the matter ought to be redressed in a timely manner so as to ensure that the elections are not vitiated as the same would adversely affect the interest of public at large. For the said reasons, the Petition prayed for a writ of Mandamus forthwith commanding the state government to consider and decide the representation submitted by the Petitioner within a period of 30 days (or before the forthcoming Panchayat Election), seeking fixation of expenditure limit for the expenses to be incurred by the candidates contesting elections of Panchayat by incorporating suitable provision and to bring the same in conformity with the existing provisions under the Representation of Peoples Act, 1951 and Section 14A of Municipal Corporation Act, 1956 and Section 32A of the M.P. Municipalities Act, 1961.

Case Title: Nagrik Upbhokta Marg Darshak Manch & Anr. v. State of M.P. & Ors.

Case No: W.P.-1479/2022

Petitioners represented by Mr. Amit Seth, Ms. Deepika Seth, Mr. Kaustubh Jha and Mr. Ishaan Jugade