‘Restrict candidates contesting 2 seats’

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court asked attorney general KK Venugopal on Monday for his assistance in a case where directions have been sought to restrict candidates from contesting from two constituencies simultaneously.

A bench led by Chief Justice Dipak Misra asked the top law officer to appear after the Election Commission of India’s (ECI) counsel informed the bench that it had twice — in 2004 and in December 2016 — sent proposals to the government to amend the election law to stop the practice.

The lawyer, Amit Sharma, submitted that huge expenditure is incurred in conducting by-elections if the candidate wins from both constituencies and deserts one of them later. Even the voters suffer, Sharma told the bench.

Proposals to amend Section 33(7) of the Representation of the People Act (RPA), 1951 — which allows a person to contest a general election or a group of by-elections or biennial elections from two constituencies — have been sent to the government. While the Law Commission accepted, the Centre was yet to reply, he said. The PIL prays for declaring Section 33(7) of the Act and its basic structure ultra-vires (beyond the powers) to the Constitution.

“‘One person, one vote’ and ‘one candidate, one constituency’ is the dictum of democracy. However, as per the law, as it stands today, a person can contest the election for the same office from two constituencies simultaneously,” reads the PIL.

Section 70 of the Act was cited to point out that the law allowed an elected lawmaker to hold a single seat. “When a candidate contests from two seats, it is imperative he has to vacate one, if he wins both. This, apart from the financial burden, government manpower and other resources for holding by-election against the resultant vacancy, is also an injustice to the voters of the constituency which the candidate is quitting from,” read the petition.