Supreme Court rejects PIL to bar candidates from contesting polls from more than one constituency
March 28, 2023
  • Circulation
  • Advertise
  • Careers
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
Organiser
  • ‌
  • Bharat
  • World
  • G20
  • Editorial
  • Analysis
  • Opinion
  • Sports
  • More
    • Defence
    • RSS in News
    • Azadi Ka Amrit Mahotsav
    • My States
    • Vocal4Local
    • Business
    • Special Report
    • Culture
    • Sci & Tech
    • Entertainment
    • Education
    • Books
    • Interviews
    • Travel
    • Health
    • Obituary
SUBSCRIBE
No Result
View All Result
  • ‌
  • Bharat
  • World
  • G20
  • Editorial
  • Analysis
  • Opinion
  • Sports
  • More
    • Defence
    • RSS in News
    • Azadi Ka Amrit Mahotsav
    • My States
    • Vocal4Local
    • Business
    • Special Report
    • Culture
    • Sci & Tech
    • Entertainment
    • Education
    • Books
    • Interviews
    • Travel
    • Health
    • Obituary
No Result
View All Result
Organiser
No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • Bharat
  • World
  • G20
  • Editorial
  • Opinion
  • Analysis
  • Culture
  • Defence
  • RSS in News
  • My States
  • Vocal4Local
  • Subscribe
Home Bharat

Supreme Court rejects PIL to bar candidates from contesting polls from more than one constituency

The Supreme Court on February 2 rejected a PIL seeking to restrict candidates from contesting elections for the same office simultaneously from more than one constituency, saying the issues pertain to the legislative domain

WEB DESK by WEB DESK
Feb 2, 2023, 03:10 pm IST
in Bharat, Delhi
Share on FacebookShare on TwitterTelegramEmail
https://organiser.org/wp-content/uploads/speaker/post-106986.mp3?cb=1675335359.mp3

The Supreme Court on February 2 rejected a PIL seeking to restrict candidates from contesting elections for the same office simultaneously from more than one constituency, saying the issues pertain to the legislative domain.

A bench of Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud and Justices PS Narasimha and JB Pardiwala declined to quash a law that allows candidates to contest from more than one constituency in an election.

The apex court said this is an issue of political democracy and it’s for the Parliament to decide not for the court.

It said permitting a candidate for contesting for more than one seat is a matter of legislative policy since ultimately its Parliament’s will on whether the political democracy is furthered by granting such choice.

The bench further said that candidates may contest from different seats due to a variety of reasons and whether this would further the course of democracy is up to the Parliament.

Saying that it cannot strike the provision as unconstitutional, the apex court said the legislative mandate is a matter of Parliamentary sovereignty.

The top court also said that its order would not prevent the Parliament from amending the law.

The order of the apex court came on a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay seeking to declare as invalid and ultra-virus section 33(7) of the Representation of the People (RP) Act, which allows a person to contest a general election or a group of bye-elections or biennial elections from two constituencies.

It also sought direction from the Centre and the Election Commission of India (ECI) to take appropriate steps to discourage independent candidates from contesting Parliament and state assembly elections.

“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 bye-election against the resultant vacancy, is also an injustice to the voters of the constituency which the candidate is quitting from,” the plea has said.

In July 2004, the Chief Election Commissioner had urged the then Prime Minister for amendment of Section 33(7) of the RP Act to provide that a person cannot contest from more than one constituency for the same office simultaneously, the petition stated.

It further added that the poll panel had alternatively suggested that if existing provisions are retained, then the candidate contesting from two seats should bear the cost of the bye-election to the seat that the contestant decides to vacate in the event of his/her winning both seats.

The Centre has not taken appropriate steps in this regard till date, it added.

Topics: Supreme CourtDY ChandrachudPILchief justice of indiasupreme court PIL
Share13TweetSendShareSend
Previous News

US expanding cooperation with India to address global challenges: US Secretary of State Blinken

Next News

Jammu twin blast: In a first, ‘perfume IED’ recovered from LeT terrorist

Related News

Supreme Court reserves verdict on MK Stalin’s Tamil Nadu Government’s appeal against permitting RSS Route Marches

Supreme Court reserves verdict on MK Stalin’s Tamil Nadu Government’s appeal against permitting RSS Route Marches

Washington Khalistanis protest: SC lawyer files complaint with Delhi Police, seeks revocation of protesters’ passports

Washington Khalistanis protest: SC lawyer files complaint with Delhi Police, seeks revocation of protesters’ passports

Recognising Same-sex relations as marriage: Need open debate for legislation; Judiciary has no role to play

Recognising Same-sex relations as marriage: Need open debate for legislation; Judiciary has no role to play

Bhopal Gas Tragedy: Supreme Court dismissed Govt of India’s petition seeking additional compensation for the victims

Bhopal Gas Tragedy: Supreme Court dismissed Govt of India’s petition seeking additional compensation for the victims

Supreme Court affirms Allahabad High Court’s 2017 order to remove illegal mosque on the High Court‘s premises

Supreme Court affirms Allahabad High Court’s 2017 order to remove illegal mosque on the High Court‘s premises

SC refuses plea to reserve 50 per cent seats for women in the National Defence Academy; lists it with Kush Kalra case

SC refuses plea to reserve 50 per cent seats for women in the National Defence Academy; lists it with Kush Kalra case

Comments

The comments posted here/below/in the given space are not on behalf of Organiser. The person posting the comment will be in sole ownership of its responsibility. According to the central government's IT rules, obscene or offensive statement made against a person, religion, community or nation is a punishable offense, and legal action would be taken against people who indulge in such activities.

Latest News

Janajati Manch writes to President to delist persons converted to other faith from receiving benefits meant for tribals

Janajati Manch writes to President to delist persons converted to other faith from receiving benefits meant for tribals

Supreme Court reserves verdict on MK Stalin’s Tamil Nadu Government’s appeal against permitting RSS Route Marches

Supreme Court reserves verdict on MK Stalin’s Tamil Nadu Government’s appeal against permitting RSS Route Marches

Ramcharitmanas: Symbol of Resistance against Colonialism

Ramcharitmanas: Symbol of Resistance against Colonialism

How mindfulness activities can play important role in improving mental health

How mindfulness activities can play important role in improving mental health

Indo-Pacific: Decoding Japanese PM Fumio Kishida’s visit to India

Indo-Pacific: Decoding Japanese PM Fumio Kishida’s visit to India

Historic passing out parade of Navy’s first batch of Agniveers to be held on March 28 — Here’s all you need to know

Historic passing out parade of Navy’s first batch of Agniveers to be held on March 28 — Here’s all you need to know

Hinduphobia in the West: Hatred against Hindus on the rise

Hinduphobia in the West: Hatred against Hindus on the rise

Pakistan: Hindu girl forcefully converted to Islam by kidnapper Amir Nawaz, returned home saying ‘I am a Hindu’

Pakistan: Hindu girl forcefully converted to Islam by kidnapper Amir Nawaz, returned home saying ‘I am a Hindu’

Comedy Circus of ‘World Happiness Report’

Comedy Circus of ‘World Happiness Report’

Ram, Allah and Abdullah

Ram, Allah and Abdullah

  • Privacy
  • Terms
  • Cookie Policy
  • Refund and Cancellation
  • Delivery and Shipping

© Bharat Prakashan (Delhi) Limited.
Tech-enabled by Ananthapuri Technologies

No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • Bharat
  • World
  • Editorial
  • Analysis
  • Opinion
  • Defence
  • Culture
  • Sports
  • Business
  • RSS in News
  • My States
  • Vocal4Local
  • Special Report
  • Sci & Tech
  • Entertainment
  • Education
  • Books
  • Interviews
  • Travel
  • Health
  • Obituary
  • Subscribe
  • Advertise
  • Circulation
  • Careers
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
  • Terms of Use
  • Refund and Cancellation

© Bharat Prakashan (Delhi) Limited.
Tech-enabled by Ananthapuri Technologies