Sunita Rawat vs State Of Uttarakhand & Others

Sudhanshu Dhulia, J

The petitioner was a candidate for the election of the local bodies in Gram Panchayat Khadri Khadakmaf, Block Doiwala, District Dehradun. In the said election, she was declared unsuccessful. As per the Rules applicable in such elections, within a period of thirty days from the date of declaration of the result of the elections, she had to submit the expenses incurred by her during the elections. The limit for such expenses at the relevant time was Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only). Admittedly petitioner has not submitted this list of expenditure incurred by her. Thereafter a list was submitted by the District Election Officer to the State Election Commission annexing the list of such candidates in the District who have not submitted the expenses incurred by them to the authority. On the report submitted by the District Election Officer, the State Election Commission published an advertisement in a newspaper on 08.07.2014 saying that for the twelve Districts of the State of Uttarakhand barring District Haridwar, the candidates must submit their expenses within a period of thirty days from the date of declaration of the result of elections, otherwise they will be declared as ineligible for contesting the election of the local bodies.

The petitioner admittedly did not reply to the said notice and consequently she was declared as ineligible on 25.07.2015. The petitioner was admittedly not aware of this fact, however, when she became aware of this fact, she moved a representation before the Uttarakhand State Election Commission praying that she may be allowed to contest the upcoming election of "Gram Pradhan". The said representation of the petitioner was rejected by the Uttarakhand State Election Commission vide order dated 11.02.2019.

The elections to the local bodies are to commence shortly and the petitioner wants to contest the election but since she has already been made ineligible to contest the election for a period of six years, she cannot participate in the elections.

Learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon the order of the State Election Commission dated 01.01.2003 wherein it has been said in Clause 6 (5) that after the list is received by the District Election Officer, the State Election Commission shall give a written show cause notice to such a candidate as to why he/she should not be declared as ineligible.

This provision has not been complied with as there is no order by which a written notice was given to the petitioner as contemplated in Clause 6 (5) of the order dated 01.01.2003.

In view thereof, the writ petition is allowed. The orders dated 25.07.2015, 19.09.2015 and 11.02.2019 are hereby quashed and set aside so far it relates to the present petitioner. The respondents shall consider the reply of the petitioner within a period of ten days from the date it is filed and thereafter pass appropriate orders therein in accordance with law.

However, since a larger question is also involved in the present case, the petitioner has the liberty to file a fresh writ petition for the same, as that issue whether the State Election Commission can frame Rules as to the eligibility of a candidate is still to be examined.