A candidate in a Legislative Council election challenged the Returning Officer's ballot serial numbering and a rival's use of 'Alphores' as a name prefix. The court held Article 329(b) barred interference during an ongoing election, citing Ponnuswami, and dismissed the writ petition.
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.
*;
[34461
HIGH COURTFOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
(SPecial Originil Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY,THETWENTY FIFTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSANDANDTWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLETHE ACTING CHIEFJUSTICE SUJOY PAUL AND
THE HONOURABLE STUITJUSTICE RENUKA YARA
IT ETI 185 0F 202
Between:
Sardar RavinderSingh. Sio S LaxmanSingh' Aged about 60 years' Occ' Aoroiate nloH ruo.1-o-58,Sikhwadi Karimnagar - 505001 '
...PEI{TIONER
AND
...RESPONDENTS
PetitionunderArticle226oflheConstitutionoflndlaprayingthqtinthe .fr"r..ilnl-".ttrtuo in in" imo",itfibd therewith, the High Court may be writ, order ordirectionSmore particularlya Writ in the nature of ;i;;;t il"nOrrr. ",;""declaring "tne Jciron of the respondentNo 3 assigning serialNo 11 to iil; ;;iiiili inoLtevatin!inelisibleoe1s91 ioserial No'$ And showinsthe ;;;d;;;;llri".+ *it, "prJtii Rtihoreswhich is not a honorific termas suchis w-niriv a,oitraryand illegal anJ' vlolative of. Articles 14' 19 3lg ?1^:i^ ' h " apn.iitoiionpf 'lndia "noion."qr"ntlydirect the.respondent No.3 to remove te piehx eipnores to thecandidatureof respondent No'4
7
lA NO: 1 oF 2025
petition under Ser:tion'1 51 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in supp:rt of the petition, the High court may be pleased to direct the respondent No.3 to produce the records concerning the documents filed by respondent No.4
Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. S SHARATH KUMAR
99t1n-:el_191$fRespondent Nos.1 to 3: SRt AVTNASHDEsAt REp., FoR SRI KOPAL SHARRAF
Counsgl for the ResponrJent No.4: --
The CCyrt made the foilowing: ORDER
THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF.IUSTICE SUJOY PAUL AND THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE RENUKA YARA -
WRIT PETITION No.5185 of 20.25
ORDER (Per the Hon'ble the Acting Chief Justi<n Sujog paut):
Sri S. Sharath Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Avinash Desai, learned Senior Counsel represents Sri Kopal Sharraf, learned counsel for respondentNos. 1 to 3.
'For the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit, it is prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a Writ Order or directions more particularly a Writ in the nature of mandamus declaring the action of the respondent No.3 assigning serial No. 1 1 to the petitioner and elevating ineligible person to serial No.S and showing the respondent No.4 with a prefix Alphores' which is not a honorific term as such is wholly arbitrary and illegal and violative of Articles 14, 16 and 2 1 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondent No.3 to remove the prefix Alphores' to the candidature of respondent No.4 and pass such other order or orders that this Hon''ble Court may deem fit and proper"
a
J The relief indicates that the main grievance of the petitioner is to the word Alphores'which is made as a prefix with the name of respondent No.4. The petitioner, along with the petition, filed a representation dated 05.O1.2025 (Annexure-P1) by projecting that this is the representation for the present
2
gnevance. However, the said representation nowher.e shows any light about the aforesaid grievance.
\
3
i l
//
envisaged in Article 32g (b) of the Constitution was considered by a six-judge Bench of supreme court in N.p. ponnuswami (supra) and the said judgment is still a good law. Thus, no interference may be made.
7 We have heard learned counsel for the parties at length.
8 Article 329(b) of the Constitution reads thus:
-"329. Bar to interference by courts in electoral.matters._ Notwitfr" t.rr ji.rg- -- -* "' anything in this Constitution
, ..(aJthe validity of any law relating to the delimitation of constituencies or tt. ,lf"t_."i of seats to such constituencie", ;;d;*;; purporting to be made under article i2? ;; article 328, shail not be called 1., qr."iio., i. any court;
a
(emphasis supplied)
paragraph Nos. 12 and 25 as under:
" 12. It seems to me that the word "election,, has the widebeen used SCNSC,i n that Part XV istosaof the v. Constitution to connote thein entire ure to be ne thro to re turn a candi date the I slature. The use the res "condu t of el ons" in ._t
ints to the wide and
4
that m eanlnq Can also be read consistentlv into the cther provisions which occur 1n Part XV includi n Article 329 b That the word "electic,n" bears this wide meaning whenever we talk ol elections in borne out by the facta thatdemocratic in most ofcountry, the booksis o_n the subject and in several cases dealing with the mzLtter, one of the questions moot;d is, when the election begins.
(-l) Having regard to the important fr-rnctions which the legisiatures have to perform in democratic countries, it has always been recognised to be a rrra tter of first importance thal ele,:tions should be concluded as ezrrly as possible according to time sch edule and all conlroversial matters and all disputes arising out of r:lection s should be postponJ till afte.r the elections are over, so that the election proceedings may not be uncluly retarded or protracted.
(2) In -conformity with this principle. th,e scheme of the election taw in ifris country as well as in England is that no slgnrficance should be attached to ins which does not affect the "election" and if anY lrre larities are cotTl mitted whileitisino rogress and thrry belonstoth e category or class which. under the law by which elecl.ions are qoverned,would have the effect of vitiating the 'election" and enablethe person affec ted to call it in question they should be brought up before a Special Tribunal by meialts of an election petition and not be rnade the subject of a dispute belbre any court while the election is rn progress.,,
(emphasis supplied)
\
r.}
:t-'.
5
- With these observations, this Writ petition is dismissed. No costs.
i'
Interlocutory applications, if any pending, shall also
stand closed.
SD/-L. LAKSHMI BABU ASS TANT REGISTRAR
//TRUE COPYII
SECTION OFFICER
To,
\
]N
- *--
HIGH COURT
DATED:25t0212025
.'<br>/,.1
i: ', !5 !l i irfr
, i
\r'
2-ar
'i:
.. 'l- + i:. --:.: . 1 I c gO
ORDER
WP.No.S185of 2025
DISMISSINGT1{E WRIT PETITION I'YITHOUTCOSTS
a(
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court could interfere mid-election with the Returning Officer's ballot serial assignment and the prefix 'Alphores' to a candidate's name despite Article 329(b) bar.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
N.P. Ponnuswami v. Returning Officer, Namakkal ConstituencyRelied on¶9
(1952) 1 SCC 94 · Who else cites this
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Sardar Ravinder Singh
The Election Commission of India
The Chief Electoral Officer and E.O., Secretary to Government, Telangana State
The Returning Officer, Election for the TS Legislative Council Medak/Karimnagar Graduates MLC constituency and the District Collector Karimnagar
Vootukuri Narender Reddy
Sujoy Paul
Renuka Yara
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
