Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Simultaneously with the Constitution of India which contained in Part XV the provisions as to superintendence, direction and control of elections to be vested in an election commission and the bar to interference by Courts in electroal matters, came the Representation of the People Act, 1950 followed soon by the Representation of the People Act, 1951. There was an attempt to amend Art. 329 itself by making it subject to the provisions of Art. 329A, but the controversy generated finally ended with the 44th amendment, dropping and omitting the amendment therein. The controversy as to the forum for challenge to the election to Lok Sabha which erupted on account of the 42nd amendment led to the verdict of the Supreme Court in Indira Gandhi v. Raj Narain (supra). A contemporaneous legislation for election to the legislative bodies gave reasons for contemplation that election laws under which law makers were elected to their respective houses should be left free of any state control (judiciary is a state) so that no one flirted with the basic features of the democracy and that the election commission alone should deal with all matters relating to the electoral rolls and elections. The earliest test whether the inhibitions under Art. 329 estopped the High Courts as well as the Supreme Court from going into the validity of elections in exercise of their respective constitutional powers is found in the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of N. P. Ponnuswami v. Returning Officer, Namak-kal, . The judgment of the Court by Fazal Ali J., while dealing with Art. 329(b) of the Constitution considered the question what is meant by the words 'no election shall be called in question', and observed as follows (Para 8):