Dismissed

Rashtriya Praja Congress (Secular) having its v. The Election Commission of India

Telangana HC1 Apr 2009WP/5052/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a writ petition filed by an unrecognized registered political party seeking an exclusive or common election symbol. The Court held that following a Supreme Court stay, the Election Commission was not directed to consider such matters and found no merit as the elections subject to the dispute had already concluded.

What did the court decide?

The High Court dismissed the writ petition praying for declaration and direction to allot an election symbol, concluding there was no merit as the relevant elections had already taken place.

Rashtriya Praja Congress (Secular)… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Telangana HC (2009)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD

¶2

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

WEDNESDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND NINE

¶4

PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH

¶5

and

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR

¶7

WRIT PETITION No.5052 of 2009

¶8

Between:

¶9

Rashtriya Praja Congress (Secular) having its Central Office at D.No. 121-113, R.P.C. Street,

¶10

Aryapuram, Rajahmundry-04, East Godavari District, Rep. by its Founder President, Meda Srinivas S/o. Suryanarayana , Hindu, 38d yrs R/o. Rajahmundry East Godavari District.

¶11

..... PETITIONER

¶12

AND

¶13

1 The Election Commission of India Rep. by its Secretary

¶14

Nirvachan Sadan, Ashoka Road, New Delhi

¶15

2 The State Election Commission of Andhra Pradesh Budda Bhavan, Tank Bund, Hyderabad.

¶16

.....RESPONDENT(S)

¶17

Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ or order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent in not allotting exclusive election symbol to the writ petitioner party by way of impugned letter No. 56/124-98/J.S.III/3437 dt. 16-2-2004 as illegal, arbitrary and it is further consequently prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to direct the respondent to allot and reserve an exclusive Election Symbol to the Writ petitioner party in the light of the judgment of this Hon'ble Court in WP No. 16128/03 dt. 8-12-2003 reported in 2004(1) AL 382 (D.B) or to allot the writ petition conch atleast as a temporary common symbol or to allot the writ petitioner any temporary common symbol to enable it to contest the ensuing Assembly and Parliament Elections and other Elections, with a common symbol in the entire state.

¶18

Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.S.R.SANKU & KAVITI MURLI KRISNA

¶19

Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.S.NIRANJAN REDDY

¶20

The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH

¶21

and

¶22

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR

¶23

WRIT PETITION No.5052 of 2009

¶24

ORDER: (per the Hon’ble Sri Justice V. Eswaraiah)

¶25

The petitioner is an unrecognized political party registered with the Election Commission of India under Section 29-A of the Representation of Peoples Act, 1951, vide Registration No.56/194/98/J.S.III/6783, dated 20-04-2000. While registering the petitioner party, the Election Commission of India indicated that a registered unrecognized political party is not entitled to reservation of any exclusive symbol. But candidates of such party would only have a preferential consideration for allotment of a free symbol over independent candidates under paragraph 12 of the Election Symbol (Reservation and Allotment) Order, 1968. The petitioner filed W.P.No.1249 of 2004 before this court seeking a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Election Commission of India in not allotting an exclusive election symbol in favour of the petitioner vide Lr.No.56/124-98/J.S.III/8646, dated 05-07-2002, as illegal and arbitrary and to direct the Election Commission of India to consider and dispose of the representations of the petitioner dated 24-112003 and 19-01-2004, pursuant to the direction of this Court in W.P.No.18224 of 2003 and to direct the respondent to allot and reserve an exclusive Election symbol in favour of the petitioner, in the light of the judgment of this court in W.P.No.16128 of 2003, dated 08-12-2003 reported in 2004 (1) ALT 382 (D.B.).

¶26

A perusal of the records relating to W.P.No.1249 of 2004 discloses that the said writ petition was dismissed for non-prosecution by order, dated 26-02-2004, and thereafter, W.P.M.P.No.9994 of 2004 was filed to set aside the default order and the said W.P.M.P. was dismissed on 06-03-2009 taking note of the fact that the Election Commission of India had already passed order dated 16-02-2004, rejecting the representation of the petitioner for

¶27

allotment of a common symbol for the candidates of the petitioner political party. The said rejection order, dated 16-02-2004 of the Election Commission of India is challenged in the present writ petition.

¶28

The impugned rejection order of the Election Commission of India is passed pursuant to the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.18224 of 2003, dated 18-09-2003. The said writ petition was filed by the petitioner questioning the letter dated 05-07-2002. Under the impugned order it was communicated to the petitioner that it was not entitled for allotment of an exclusive common symbol. Writ Petition No.18224 of 2003 was dismissed stating that there was hardly any ground on the basis of which the action of the Election Commission of India, which was impugned in the said writ petition, can be faulted in view of the relevant provision in the Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order, 1968. However, liberty was reserved to the petitioner to represent to the Election Commission again for appropriate orders. Pursuant to the said order only, the impugned order dated 16-02-2004 has been passed rejecting the request of the petitioner, holding that there was no ground to allot a common symbol for the candidates of the petitioner political party.

¶29

It is not in dispute that recognized political parties alone are entitled to reserve symbols and the recognition is allied with the reserved symbol. Insofar as unrecognized registered political parties are concerned, they have no right to reserve a symbol. But, however, they have a preferential right over independent candidates while considering the allotment of a symbol from out of the free symbols under paragraph 12. In respect of the registered unrecognized political party, Lok Satta Party, we had taken a prima facie view in W.P.M.P.Nos.4166 and 4167 of 2009 in W.P.No.3212 of 2009, dated 25-03-2009 stating that no unrecognized political party has got any right to reserve symbol. But, however, the case of unrecognized registered political parties for preferential allotment of free symbols as common symbols can as well be considered by the Election Commission, instead of various Returning Officers. That order was carried in appeal by Special Leave Petition No.SLP

¶30

(C) 7379-7380/2009 before the Supreme Court of India and the Supreme Court of India by its order, dated 27-03-2009, stayed the order of this court to the extent that the Election Commission was directed to consider giving common symbols to all the candidates to be put up by all the registered unrecognized parties. The Hon’ble Supreme Court further made it clear that the three political parties before the Apex Court are not entitled to get any preferential treatment in respect of the symbol and no equity will be given in future when allotment of regular symbol arise for consideration before the Election Commission. The consideration of the common symbol was confined to the parties before the Supreme Court in the S.L.P. and the two writ petitions. Therefore, we are of the opinion that as per the aforesaid order of the Apex Court, it is not open for this court to direct the Election Commission to consider the case of the petitioner for allotment of any particular symbol from out of the free symbols. Further, it is noticed that the petitioner has not made any application for allotment of a common symbol for the ensuing elections. The applications filed by the petitioner and the rejection order pertain to the 2004 elections. Therefore, we do not see any merit in the writ petition and the same is liable to be dismissed.

¶31

Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶32

________________ V.ESWARAIAH, J

¶33

__________________ SANJAY KUMAR, J

¶34

Date : 01-04-2009 Note: Issue C.C. in two days (B/o) Prv

¶35

..... REGISTRAR

¶36

// TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To