Disposed

Imadabathula Dilip Kumar v. the Election Commission of India

Andhra Pradesh HC23 Jan 2024WP(PIL)/77/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a PIL challenging the preparation of electoral rolls in Machilipatnam for alleged violations of Rule 6 regarding voter allocation, the High Court observed that objections were verified and disposed of. Finding the respondents not adverse to rectification, the court disposed of the petition without granting specific relief or costs.

What did the court decide?

None. The petition was disposed of without any specific direction or cost awards.

Imadabathula Dilip Kumar Vs the… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Andhra Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶2

WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶3

PRESENT HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, CHIEF JUSTICE AND

¶4

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.RAGHUNANDAN RAO

¶5

WP(PIL) NO: 77 OF 2023

¶6

Between:

¶7

Imadabathula Dilip Kumar, S/o. Nageswara Rao, Aged about 50 years, Occ Business, R/o. D.No.20/342-22-A, Chilakalapudi Revenue, Ward No.20, Machilipatnam, Krishna District. Mobile No.^{9849546368Email} Address [email protected] Aadhar No.2007 2849 3507^SBA/c. No.100051100002922, Yes Bank, Machilipatnam

¶8

...Petitioner

¶9

AND

¶10

The Election Commission of India, Nirvachan Sadan, Ashoka Road, New Delhi.

¶11

The Principal Secretary-cum-Chief Election Officer,^{StateofAndhra} Pradesh, Amaravathi.

¶12

The District Collector-cum-District Election Officer, Krishna District, Machilipatnam.

¶13

The Revenue Divisional Officer-cum-Electoral Registration Officer, Machilipatnam Assembly Constituency, Machilipatnam.

¶14

... Respondents

¶15

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue writ or direction more particularly^{oneinthenatureof} WRIT of MANDAMUS to direct Respondent No.4 to comply with the direction issued by Respondent No.3 vide File No. REVCORDOELC/36/2023-SA(COORDN-5)-KCOC dated 08.03.2023^anddirect Respondent No.3 to Comply with the direction issued by Respondent No.2 vide Memo No.263/Elecs.B/A1/2022-1 dated 21.02.2023.To direct the

¶16

Electoral Registration Authorities to maintain transparency in registration of voters and to see that no voter be deprived to cast^theirvote in free and fair elections in Machilipatnam Legislative Assembly Constituency, while directing Respondent No.1 to Respondent No.4 to prepare^electoral rolls for the Machilipatnam Assembly Constituency strictly adhering to Rule 6 of Election Registration Rolls.

¶17

lA NO: 1 OF 2023

¶18

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the^{circumstances} stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct Respondent No.4 to implement the direction issued by Respondent No.3 vide Memo No.263/Elecs.B/A1/2022-1 Dated 21.02.2023 in letter and spirit, under due intimation to this petitioner, in accordance with the Rules, during pendency of the main Writ Petition.

¶19

lA NO: 2 OF 2023

¶20

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to issue an interim direction to Respondent No.4/ ERO-cum-RDO to comply with the directions issued by Respondent No. 1/Election Commission of India in Proceedings Lr.No.23/2023-ERS(Vol.lll) dated 29.05.2023 in letter and spirit, so as to conduct free and fair elections in the democratic State, under due intimation to this petitioner, in accordance with the Rules, during pendency of the main Writ Petition or direct the 2 nd Respondent to detach him with duties of registration of elections, entrusting the duty to any other competent officer, during pendency of the main Writ Petition.

¶21

Counsel for the Petitioner: SMT M.V.RAMANA KUMARI Counsel for the Respondents 1 & 2: SRI AVINASH DESAI,^a/w SRI D.S.SIVA DARSHAN, SC for EC

¶22

Counsel for the Respondents 3 & 4: GP FOR REVENUE

¶23

The Court made the following order:

¶24

IN THE HIGH COURT OP ANDHRA PRADESH: AMARAVATI

¶25

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, CHIEF JUSTICE

¶26

¶27

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO

¶28

WRIT PETITION CPUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATIONS No.77 of²⁰²³

¶29

Sri. Imadabathula Dilip Kumar, S/o. Nageswara Rao, Aged about 50 yeaj?s, Occ: Business, D.No.20/342-22-a, Chilakalapudi, Revenue Ward No.20, Machilipatnam, Krishna District - 521001.

¶30

... Petitioner

¶31

Versus

¶32

The Election Commission of India, Nirvachan Sadan, Ashoka Road, New Delhi and three others.

¶33

...Respondents

¶34

Mr. M. V. Ramana Kumar, Counsel for the petitioner.

¶35

Mr. Avinash, Desai, a/w Mr. D. S. Siva Darshan, Counsel^for respondent Nos.l and 2.

¶36

GP for Revenue, Counsel for respondent Nos.3 and 4.

¶37

DATE : 24.01.2024

¶38

PER DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, CJ:

¶39

The present petition has been filed in public interest^alleging that the official respondents had not strictly followed^themandate of Sections 21, 22 and 23 of the Representation of People^Act, 1950

¶40

HCJ a RRR, J WP_PIL_77 of 2023

¶41

¶42

(hereinafter referred to as “the Act, 1950”) as also^{theRegistration} of Electors Rules, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as “the Rules, 1950”) while preparing the electoral rolls. It is stated^thatwhile preparing electoral rolls for the Machilipatnam Assembly and Parliamentary Constituencies, the Revenue Divisional^Officer-cum- Electoral Registration Officer/respondent No.4 herein^hadallotted voters, some of them belonging to the same family to different polling stations which is contrary to the mandate of^Rule6ofthe Rules, 1960 which envisages that the name of electors in each part of the roll shall be arranged according to house number,^unlessthe Chief Electoral Officer, subject to any instructions issued by the Election Commission that alphabetical order is more^convenientor that the names shall be arranged partly in one way and partly in another.

¶43

It is the case of the petitioner that having found irregularities in the preparation of electoral rolls in the draft and final rolls. objections were raised before respondent No.4, who^hadfailedto rectify the defects contrary to the requirement of^law and in particular as envisaged under Rule 6 of the Rules,^1960andwould have the effect of depriving the voters from exercising their right to vote which is contrary to the spirit of democracy.

¶44

HCJ a RRR, J WP_PIL_77 of 2023

¶45

¶46

Counsel for respondent Nos.l and 2, Mr. Avinash Desai, however, placed reliance upon a communication dated 23.01.2024, addressed to him by the Revenue Divisional Officer-cum-Electoral Registration Officer, Machilipatnam and the same is taken on record.

¶47

According to this communication, it appears that objections with regard to Eleven Hundred and Forty (1140) voters was forwarded by the petitioner were thoroughly verified by Booth Level Officers, by strictly following the instructions^{oftheDistrict} Election Officer and Collector, Krishna District. It is stated that except Eight (08) objections which pertained to voters whose Electors Photo Identification Card numbers were not found in the electoral roll, the remaining objections have since been disposed of

¶48

As an instance, six (06) cases out of the Eleven Hundred^and Forty (1140) highlighted by the petitioner have been^citedinwhich among others, action was tak:en and their votes were shifted to the booths of their family members as per their ordinary place of residence. It is further stated in the communication that on the basis of field verification of Booth Level Officers and remarks of the

¶49

HCJ & RRR, J WP_PIL_77 of 2023

¶50

¶51

Assistant Electoral Registration Officers, approximately^the5360 other objections have since been disposed, of as per^theElection Commission of India norms.

¶52

From the stand which the respondents have taken in^the present case, it is clear that the respondents are^{notatallaversein} rectifying any mistake which was brought to their notice^tomsLkeit compliant with the Act, 1950 and Rules of 1960. In fact, the stand taken is that the rectification and updation of electoral^rolls is a continuous process, except for the period between the^lastdatefor making nominations in any election, in a constituency^andthedate of declaration of results of the said election and that except for the said period, deletions, additions and corrections can always be effected in an electoral roll till the last date.

¶53

We are satisfied with the stand of the official respondents^that the objections raised and brought to the notice of respondent No.4 have been looked into and therefore, the plea of the petitioner that the objections were not considered may not be entirely^correct. We, however, observe that in case there are any other discrepancies apart from the ones which appear to have been looked into by the respondents, it would be open to the petitioner to bring the same to

¶54

HCJ a RRR, J WP_PIL_77 of 2023

¶55

¶56

the notice of the official respondents who would take steps to

¶57

consider the same in accordance with the Rules, 1960.

¶58

The writ petition (public interest litigation) is,^accordingly. disposed of. No order as to costs.

¶59

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand^closed.

¶60

To,

¶61

//TRUE COPY//

¶62

SD/- B. PRASADA RAO ASSISTANT R^^GI^RAR

¶63

SECTIONOFFICER

¶64

The Election Commission of India, Nirvachan Sadan, Ashoka Road. New Delhi.

¶65

The Principal Secretary-cum-Chief Election Officer, State of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravathi.

¶66

The District Collector-cum-District Election Officer, Krishna District Machilipatnam.

¶67

The Revenue Divisional Officer-cum-Electoral Registration Officer, Machilipatnam Assembly Constituency, Machilipatnam.

¶68

One CC to Srnt M.V.Ramana Kumari, Advocate [OPUC] 6. One CC to Sri D.V.Siva Darshan, SC for Election Commission [OPUC] 7. Two CCs to GP for Revenue, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] 8. Two CD Copies

RAM

MBT

/ ,

HIGH COURT

DATED: 24/01/2024

ORDER

WP(PIL).No.77 of 2023

¶76

DISPOSING OF THE WP(PIL) WITHOUT COSTS

Imadabathula Dilip Kumar v. the Election Commission of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Imadabathula Dilip Kumar v. the Election Commission of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

P Hari Preeth Vs the State of Ap

Mallu Jayaramireddy Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

B Narasimhulu Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

K S S Obedullah Hussainy Vs State of Ap

Prathi Papa Rao Vs The State of Andhra Prdesh

Kaliki Ranga Reddy Vs State of Andhra Pradesh