Dr Mahesh Kumar Yadav vs Union Of India And Ors

The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the declaration of result for the election of 11 members of the Veterinary Council of India, as declared by the memorandum/letter dt.24.08.2020. The petitioner also challenges a notification issued by the Central Government dt.03.09.2020, notifying 11 elected members for the Veterinary Council of India in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (g) of sub-section (3) of Section 3 and sub-section 6(3) of the Indian Veterinary Council Act, 1984.

Learned counsel for the petitioner-Mr. Narendra Singh Yadav, submitted that grave illegality has been committed in election of the members. Learned counsel submitted that the petitioner immediately on declaration of the result, had raised objection on 24.08.2020 before the Election Officer and in spite of objection of the petitioner on the result, notification dt.03.09.2020 has been issued.

Learned counsel submitted that the petitioner has also raised dispute under Section 4(2) of the Indian Veterinary Council Act, 1984 before the Secretary, Department of Animal Husbandry & Dairying, Ministry of Fisheries, Animal Husbandry & Dairying, Government of India, New Delhi.

Learned counsel submitted that without deciding the dispute, the respondents have issued a notification dt.03.09.2020 of 11 elected members of the Veterinary Council of India and now the respondents further want to elect as President and Vice President.

Learned counsel submitted that since the very election of members is against the statutory provisions of the Veterinary Council Act and Indian Veterinary Council Rules, 1985 and as such members cannot be further permitted to be elected as President and Vice President.

I have heard the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the material available on record.

This Court finds that the elections to the Veterinary Council is conducted as per Section 4 of the Indian Veterinary Council Act, 1984 and sub-Section (2) of the Section 4 provides that if there is a dispute regarding any election to the council, it is required to be referred to the Central Government for its decision and the same shall be final.

This Court finds that the grievances, which are raised by the petitioner in respect of eligibility of the candidates to contest the elections and further election in violation of the Rules, cannot be decided in the writ jurisdiction.

This Court further finds that there is a mechanism provided in the Act itself regarding elections to the council and the petitioner himself has filed such objection before the Secretary, Department of Animal Husbandry and Dairying, Government of India on 03.09.2020. The petitioner is required to pursue the remedy, which is provided under the law.

This Court cannot exercise the extra-ordinary jurisdiction to decide the election disputes. The writ petition, as such is not entertained.

The dispute, which is pending before the Secretary, Department of Animal Husbandry and Dairying, Government of India, is said to be filed on 03.09.2020 by the petitioner and it is expected from the said Authority that if the disputes have been raised about the elections, the objections are required to be decided in expeditious manner.

The grievances, which have been raised by the petitioner before the Competent Authority need to be dealt with, as per the Election Rules framed by the Government of India in respect of the Veterinary Council of India, which is a statutory body and required to be constituted, as per provisions of the Indian Veterinary Council Act and Veterinary Council Rules.

Accordingly, the present writ petition is not entertained and the same is dismissed. The petitioner is at liberty to raise all his grievances before the Competent Authority about the dispute of election and the Competent Authority is directed to look into all the aspects or the issues relating to elections of the Indian Veterinary Council of India.