The Bombay High Court dismissed a PIL seeking to reschedule the Satara parliamentary election. It held that directing a postponement would amount to improper interference with the electoral process under Article 226.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
ash
pil-95.14
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.95 OF 2014
Pravin P. Wategaonkar. .. Petitioner Vs The Election Commission of India & Anr. .. Respondents
Shri P.P. Wategaonkar, the Petitioner in person. Shri S.K. Shinde, Government Pleader for Respondent No.2.
P.C.
Not on board. Taken on board.
made in this Petition is for issuing a writ of mandamus directing the Election Commission to reschedule the Election in Satara Parliamentary Constituency scheduled to be held on 16th April 2014 and to hold it on 24th April 2014. The grievance of the Petitioner appearing in person is based on the letter dated 24th March 2014 addressed by a political party to the Chief Election Officer of Maharashtra making allegations against a political leader regarding his alleged speech. The Petitioner is relying upon the representation made by him to the Chief Election Officer of the Maharashtra on 2nd April 2014.
ash 2 pil-95.14
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a writ court can direct the Election Commission to postpone an election in a particular constituency.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Pravin P. Wategaonkar
The Election Commission of India
Unidentified
As recorded by the court registry
Litigation brought on behalf of the public interest rather than a personal grievance, relaxing the usual rule of locus standi.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
