Election process cannot be interfered with: Supreme Court

Background

• The petitioner had submitted that the post of the President in his Panchayat has been reserved for Scheduled Cast community for two consecutive terms (2015-2020 and 2020-2025).

• The results of the local body elections were declared on 16th December and the election result of Panchayat Presidents is scheduled to be declared on December 30th.

• The petitioner argued before the Kerala High Court that election of President was distinct from that of election of local body representatives by the general public.

• Senior Advocate Jaideep Guptaappearing for the State of Kerala contended that same election notification covers both the processes and that one cannot be separated from another.

• The High Court set aside a direction issued by a single bench of Justice A Muhamed Mustaque to the State Election Commission to recast the reservations for scheduled castes and women to the posts of President and Chairpersons of Panchayats and Municipalities and had observed that successive or consecutive reservation to the offices of the Chairpersons and President of the local authorities is illegal.

• A division bench of Chief Justice S Manikumar and Justice Shaji P Chaly observed that, "Therefore, to recast, as directed by the Single Judge, the election process already started by the State Election Commission will have to be put on hold, which is an interference in the election process. It's not right to interfere with the electoral process, especially when implementing the directive of the Single Judge is a complex and complicated procedure."

Supreme Court’s order

• A Special Leave Petition was filed before the Supreme Court challenging the reservation notification issued by the State Election Commission for local body heads on the ground that it led to successive/consecutive reservations of the posts of Panchayat Presidents and Municipality Chairpersons.

• A bench comprising Justices Indira Banerjee and Hemant Gupta agreed with the decision of the High Court and cited Article 243O of the Constitution (Bar to interference by courts in electoral matters) while observing that the petitioner may file an election petition before the appropriate forum in accordancewith respect to his grievances.

• The court while dismissing the petition held that, "Election process can't be interfered within the middle."

What are your views on the Court’s order? Let us know in the comment section below.