SC may contest candidates’ fight from two 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 – once in 2004 and then in December 2016 – sent the 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 the by-elections if the candidate wins from both the 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 has accepted, the Centre was yet to reply, he said.
Filed by an advocate, 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
ECI has suggested if existing provisions are retained, then candidates contesting from two seats should bear the cost of the byelection to the seat they decide to vacate in event of winning both the seats.
A PIL BY LAWYER ON BEHALF OF ECI
simultaneously,” read the PIL.
Section 70 of the Representation Act was cited to point out that the law allowed an elected lawmaker to hold only one seat.
“When a candidate contests from two seats, it is imperative that he has to vacate one of the two seats, if he wins both. This, apart from the consequent unavoidable financial burden on the public exchequer, 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.
The PIL also relied on ECI’s recommendation given in 2004, asking the Prime Minister to amend the law and do away with the existing system.
“The ECI alternatively suggested that if existing provisions are retained, then the candidate contesting from two seats should bear the cost of the by-election to the seat that the contestant decides to vacate in the event of his/her winning both seats. The amount in such an event could be ~5 lakh for state assembly and council election, and ~ 10 lakh for election to the House of People.”