Telugu Desam Party and another vs Election Commission of India, New Delhi and others

B. Subhashan Reddy, J.—This writ petition has been filed by Telugu Desam Party represented by Prof. C. Laxmanna, Member of Central Election Monitoring Committee, Hyderabad as also by Mr. M. Chandrasekhar, Chief Election Agent of Dharmavaram Constituency of Anantapur District, seeking declaration that the action of the respondents, namely, Election Commission of India, Chief Electoral Officer, Andhra Pradesh, District Election Officer, Anantapur and Returning Officer, 173-Dharmavaram Constituency, Anantapur, in not taking any steps for conducting free and fair elections in 173-Dharmavaram Assembly Constituency on 5-9-1999 as arbitrary, illegal, unreasonable and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to conduct repoll in Booth Nos.1 to 76 of 173-Dharmavaram Assembly Constituency.

Mr. K. Ramakrishna Reddy, the learned senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners strenuously contends that there was large scale rigging in 76 polling booths of 173-Dhartnavaram Assembly Constituency and that even though a representation in this regard has been made to the respondents, no action has been taken. He also submits that the only authority which can consider with regard to the plea of repoll is the Election Commission and cites Section 58 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 as also Article 324 of the Constitution.

Mr. C.P. Sarathy, the learned senior Counsel appearing for the Election Commission of India, has produced before us the letter No.495/AP of 1999, dated 16-9-1999 addressed to the Chief Electoral Officer, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad, from which it is obvious that the Election Commission has considered the reports of the Chief Electoral officer, A.P., District Election Officer, Anantapur, concerned Returning Officer as also the Superintendent of Police, Anantapur and came to a decision that repoll in any of the polling stations in Putluru and Yellanuru Mandals of 173-Dharmavaram Assembly constituency is not called for.

It has to be borne in mind that this Court though is a Constitutional Court and is entitled to issue writs in appropriate cases, will not sit in appeal over the decision of the Election Commission and the remedy, if any, available to the petitioners is to file an election petition on the grounds enumerated in Section 100 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.

In the circumstances, this writ petition is dismissed. No costs.

Mr. K. Ramakrishna Reddy, the learned senior Counsel, then makes a mention that a further representation has been made by the 1st petitioner as also the contesting candidate on behalf of Telugu Desam Party to the Election Commission of India for repoll, and that this order may not come in the way of the Election Commission to consider the said representation. We are not here to restrain the Election Commission to entertain any representation and to dispose of the same on its own merits.