Read Time: 09 minutes
Top Court has further said elections to any office/body are required to be free, fair and transparent. "Elections lie at the core of democracy. The authority entrusted by law to hold/conduct such elections is to be completely independent of any extraneous influence/consideration", added the bench
The Supreme Court on Wednesday said constitutional courts are duty bound to step in when level playing fields are sought to be disturbed even when the election notification is issued.
With this view, top court has set aside the entire election process for the Ladakh Autonomous Hill Development Council, Kargil and ordered Administration of Union Territory of Ladakh, Election Department, to issue fresh notification for it within seven days.
A bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Ahsanuddin Amanullah has also dismissed the appeal filed by the UT administration against the Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court's division bench order of August 14 upholding the single bench decision to allot 'plough' symbol to Jammu and Kashmir National Conference (JKNC) party.
Court has further imposed Rs one lakh cost on the administration to be deposited in the Supreme Court Advocates on Record Welfare Fund within two weeks while declaring that JKNC is entitled to the exclusive allotment of the plough symbol for candidates proposed to be put up by it.
The court made strong observations against the UT administration and its election authority for denial of symbol to the party with "the serious consequence that its identity as a political party was eclipsed, right before the election to the council where it was the incumbent party in power.
"The restraint, self-imposed, by the Courts as a general principle, laid out in some detail in some of the decisions, in election matters to the extent that once a notification is issued and the election process starts, the Constitutional Courts, under normal circumstances are loath to interfere, is not a contentious issue. But where issues crop up, indicating unjust executive action or an attempt to disturb a level-playing field between candidates and/or political parties with no justifiable or intelligible basis, the Constitutional Courts are required, nay they are duty-bound, to step in. The reason that the courts have usually maintained a hands-off approach is with the sole salutary objective of ensuring that the elections, which are a manifestation of the will of the people, are taken to their logical conclusion, without delay or dilution thereof," the bench said.
Court expressed surprise over Union Territory of Ladakh denial of the plough symbol to JKNC even upon timely intervention by the learned Single Judge, as it left no stone unturned not only to resist but also frustrate a cause simply by efflux of time.
The bench has categorically emphasised that no litigant should have even an iota of doubt or an impression (rather, a misimpression) that just because of systemic delay or the matter not being taken up by the courts resulting in efflux of time the cause would be defeated, and the court would be rendered helpless to ensure justice to the party concerned.
"It would not be out of place to mention that this court can even turn the clock back, if the situation warrants such dire measures. The powers of this court, if need be, to even restore status quo ante are not in the realm of any doubt," the bench said.
In its 51-page judgement, the apex court also expressed its concern over the High Courts not deciding cases on the ground that the leading judgment of the supreme court on the subject is either referred to a larger bench or a review petition relating thereto is pending.
"In this regard, we lay down the position in law. We make it absolutely clear that the High Courts will proceed to decide matters on the basis of the law as it stands. It is not open, unless specifically directed by this court, to await an outcome of a reference or a review petition, as the case may be. It is also not open to a High Court to refuse to follow a judgment by stating that it has been doubted by a later Coordinate Bench. In any case, when faced with conflicting judgments by benches of equal strength of this Court, it is the earlier one which is to be followed by the High Courts," the bench added, citing the 5-Judge bench judgement in 'National Insurance Company Limited vs. Pranay Sethi', (2017).
Case Title: UNION TERRITORY OF LADAKH & ORS. vs. JAMMU AND KASHMIR NATIONAL CONFERENCE & ANR.
Please Login or Register
