The Representation of the People Act, 1951 lays down the procedures for deciding disputes arising out of the election of a Member of the Parliament or State Legislature. The Act provides for the establishment of Election Tribunals at the state and national level to hear and decide disputes related to the election of Members of Parliament and State Legislatures.
Procedure for deciding disputes:
Filing of a petition: Any person aggrieved by the election of a returned candidate can file a petition before the relevant Election Tribunal within 45 days of the date of the election.
Service of notice: The Tribunal shall serve a notice to the returned candidate and give them an opportunity to file a reply to the petition.
Evidence: The Tribunal shall hear the evidence produced by the parties and make a decision based on the evidence presented.
Decision: The Tribunal shall make a decision and declare the election of the returned candidate as void if it is satisfied that the election was not conducted in accordance with the principles laid down in the Act and the rules made thereunder.
Grounds on which the election of any returned candidate may be declared void:
Corrupt practices: If the returned candidate has been found guilty of any corrupt practices under the Act.
Non-compliance with the provisions of the Act and rules: If the returned candidate or their agent has failed to comply with the provisions of the Act and rules made thereunder.
Illegal practices: If the returned candidate or their agent has committed any illegal practices during the election.
Disqualification of the candidate: If the returned candidate is disqualified under the Constitution or any other law for the time being in force.
Remedy available to the aggrieved party:
Appeal: The aggrieved party can file an appeal against the decision of the Election Tribunal before the High Court within 30 days of the decision.
Special Leave Petition: The aggrieved party can also file a Special Leave Petition before the Supreme Court if they are not satisfied with the decision of the High Court.
Case laws:
In the case of "Dr. Subramanian Swamy v. Election Commission of India" (2013), the Supreme Court held that the Election Commission has the power to disqualify a Member of Parliament or State Legislature if they have been found guilty of corrupt practices under the Representation of the People Act, 1951.
In the case of "Kuldip Nayar v. Union of India" (2006), the Supreme Court held that the Election Commission has the power to disqualify a Member of Parliament or State Legislature if they have failed to comply with the provisions of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 and the rules made thereunder.
In conclusion, The Representation of the People Act, 1951 lays down the procedures for deciding disputes arising out of the election of a Member of the Parliament or State Legislature. The Act provides for the establishment of Election Tribunals at the state and national level to hear and decide disputes related to the election of Members of Parliament and State Legislatures. The Act provides for the grounds on which the election of any returned candidate may be declared void, such as corrupt practices, non-compliance with the provisions of the Act and rules, illegal practices, and disqualification of the candidate. The aggrieved party can seek remedy against the decision of the Election Tribunal by filing an appeal before the High Court and if not satisfied, can file a Special Leave Petition before the Supreme Court. These case laws are examples of how the Indian judiciary has interpreted the act and provided clarity on the power of the Election Commission and the remedies available to the aggrieved party. However, it is important to note that the final decision on the disputes arising out of the election of a Member of the Parliament or State Legislature ultimately lies with the Election Commission, High court and Supreme Court.
