Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

(d) The remedy of election petition can be availed by the candidates and since petitioners are not allowed to contest, as a result of excessive reservation made in favour of Women, they cannot avail the remedy of election petition, as provided under Section 43 of the Act of 1994 as well as under Rule 80 of the Rules of 1994 and thus, the petitioners cannot be rendered remediless.
(e) The power of judicial review is the basic feature of the Indian Constitution and one of the ingredients of basic structure is the democratic nature of our republic and free and fair election forms the foundation of democracy and the Courts cannot remain mute spectator against such manifest arbitrariness of the State authorities and as such the bar contained under Article 243-O(a) of the Constitution of India, is not applicable and the writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, would be maintainable.

22. to 27 XX XX XX

28. Election disputes are not just private civil disputes between two parties. Though there is an individual or a few individuals arrayed as parties before the Court but the stakes of the constituency as a whole are on trial. Whichever way the lis terminates it affects the fate of the constituency and the citizens generally. A conscientious approach with overriding consideration for welfare of the constituency and strengthening the democracy is called for. Neither turning a blind eye to the controversies which have arisen nor assuming a role of over- enthusiastic activist would do. The two extremes have to be avoided in dealing with election disputes.

(iii) The power of judicial review can be exercised when the process of election is so vitiated that it becomes abhorrent to the fundamentals of democracy and is a farce which if allowed to continue and allowed to be challenged by the time consuming process of election petition would shake the confidence of people in democracy.

10 to 12.3 XX XX XX 12.4 In the earlier part of this judgment this Court found with the aid of Ashok Kumar's case of Apex Court, that Art.329/Art.243-O(b) does not close all doors on a litigant seeking recourse to judicial review under Art. 226 to assail an election.

12.7 Any election process which is vitiated by violence and riot cannot be termed as free and fair. Such vitiated process of election strikes at the very root of democracy by allowing occupation of elected offices by persons/candidates who assume power by force rather than mandate of people thereby endangering democracy.

12.8 The question that now arises is whether in the attending facts herein where open violence and riot was complained of by the Presiding Officer, should the writ court have turned a Nelson's eye toward the obvious by closing the doors of justice under Article 226 and relegated the petitioner to avail remedy of election petition, thereby allowing an unlawfully elected appellant to wield power sans peoples mandate.