Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 5 of 5 (1.48 seconds)Article 21 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
The Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888
People'S Union For Civil Liberties & Anr vs Union Of India on 16 December, 2003
902-PIL(L)-769-2026.doc Dixit
::: Uploaded on - 05/03/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 06/03/2026 20:44:35 :::
been considered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in "People's
Union for Civil Liberties v. Union of India" 2. The State Election
Commission, Maharashtra made an observation that NOTA
shall be treated as a fictional electorate candidate while
declaring the election results. It contemplates a situation where
all the candidates individually receive lesser votes than the
fictional electorate candidate. It also conceives a situation where
the contesting candidate and the fictional electorate candidate
receive equal valid votes. In the event when none of the
contesting candidates is declared elected, fresh elections shall
be held from the state of nomination. It has also been observed
that on the second occasion, the contesting candidate who
secures highest votes excluding NOTA shall be declared as
elected.
Ashok Kumar Pandey vs The State Of West Bengal on 18 November, 2003
3. We understand that there is a statutory regime for conduct of
the Municipal elections. In addition to that, there are guidelines
by the State Election Commission, Maharashtra, as aforesaid.
In the circumstances of the case, this writ petition labelled as
Public Interest Litigation must be held to be an abuse of the
process of law. Seeking a direction to the Election Commission
of India, though the Election Commission of India does not
conduct Municipal Elections in the State of Maharashtra, to
declare results of Ward Nos.5(A), 14(A), 17(B), 18(B), 18(C) and
18(D) after polling and counting of the votes is frivolous. The
petitioner who claims that he is associated with Dharmarajya
Kamgar-Karmachari Mahasangh, a Labour Union which works
for the welfare of the labourers and workers and more
particularly Municipal workers does not say that he is
espousing the cause of the labourers particularly the Municipal
workers. It is settled law, as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court
in "Ashok Kumar Pandey v. State of West Bengal" (2004) 3 SCC
349, a Public Interest Litigation with vague information should
not be entertained. The pleadings in this Public Interest
Litigation is a sketchy and casual and warrants imposition of
exemplary costs. However, exercising restraint, we refrain from
imposing any costs and would simply dismiss Public Interest
Litigation No.4 of 2026."
1