15 october 2024 : The Punjab and Haryana High Court has paved the way for panchayat elections in Punjab by dismissing several petitions that alleged irregularities in the nomination process.
The Division Bench, consisting of Justice Sureshwar Thakur and Justice Sudeepti Sharma, issued this ruling after extensive hearings that took place both before and after lunch. Over 800 petitions were presented before the Bench, marking a record number for an election-related case.
This ruling, delivered just one day before the scheduled polls, allows elections to proceed as planned and is crucial for approximately 1.05 lakh candidates competing for panchayat and sarpanch positions.
The state’s position, articulated by Punjab Advocate-General Gurminder Singh, cited Article 243-O, which imposes a complete bar on court intervention in election matters once the polling process has begun. He referenced multiple judgments to support his argument, emphasizing that the only way to contest a panchayat election is through an election petition presented according to legal guidelines.
In response to a court inquiry, Gurminder Singh also explained that the principles of natural justice, which would require giving candidates an opportunity to be heard when rejecting their nomination papers, are not included in the Punjab Panchayat Raj Act. He stated that the law only requires a brief record of the decision.
Conversely, the petitioners’ counsel argued that the court could indeed intervene and that there was no legal provision preventing such action. They claimed that nomination papers were rejected without any explanation, simply stating “rejected” in the order. It was also argued that some nominations were dismissed on trivial grounds, and in certain instances, only one candidate remained after others were rejected, resulting in that individual being declared elected unopposed. The petitioners contended that elections should still be held, as NOTA (None of the Above) remains a viable option for voters. Both sides heavily referenced a Supreme Court judgment regarding a similar situation in Ladakh.
