This story is from January 29, 2020

Delhi elections: HC dismisses pleas of candidates whose papers were rejected

Delhi elections: HC dismisses pleas of candidates whose papers were rejected
Image used for representational purpose only
NEW DELHI: Delhi high court on Tuesday refused to entertain petitions by several independent candidates challenging the rejection of their nomination for contesting the assembly polls.
Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva said under the Representation of People Act, only one election petition was permissible, and it could be filed after the results were declared. The law formed by the Parliament, and subsequently upheld by the Supreme Court, is clear that only one election petition is permissible, and therefore, it “has to be respected”, the court said.
Dismissing the plea, Justice Sanjiv Sachdeva said that under two provisions — Article 226 and Section 100 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 — the court could hear the matter only after the elections were over and added that the apex court had also held that the right to contest an election was “not a civil right but a creature of statute.”
One of the plea contended that the returning officer wrongly rejected the nomination papers and also favoured the chief minister.
It sought directions to the officials to make appropriate guidelines and facilitate smooth filing of the nomination by all candidates from all walks of the society.
But declining to issue any direction, the court said such type of petition was not an appropriate remedy as countermanding an election entailed huge costs and inconvenience to the stakeholders.
Meanwhile, the Election commission raised questions on the maintainability of the petitions and submitted that the scrutiny has already taken place and the date of withdrawal of nomination has also passed.
Several people had approached the court seeking “reasonable time” to file their nomination alleging that they were not able to do the same due to the long queues and special treatment meted to the CM. They argued that the nomination papers were illegally, arbitrarily and unconstitutionally rejected, and that they had been deprived of their constitutional rights.
End of Article
FOLLOW US ON SOCIAL MEDIA