A bench of Chief Justice Dipak Misra and justices A M Khanwilkar and D Y Chandrachud has overruled an Election Commission notification, saying that NOTA (None Of The Above) option cannot be allowed in Rajya Sabha elections, as it would not only undermine the purity of democracy but also serve the Satan of defection and corruption.
In the instant writ petition preferred under Article 32 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner Shailesh Manubhai Parmar, who is the Chief Whip of the Indian National Congress party in Gujarat Legislative Assembly challenges the circular dated 1st August, 2017 issued by the Secretary, Gujarat Legislature Secretariat, ECI, in relation to the conduct of elections for the Council of States. The Petitioner challenged the availability of the option ― None of the Above.
Election Commission of India had issued directions to the Chief Electoral Officers of all the States and the Union Territories (except Andaman & Nicobar Islands, Chandigarh, Dadra & Nagar Haveli, Daman & Diu and Lakshadweep) directing that the option of NOTA could be
applicable for elections in the Rajya Sabha and the said option shall be printed on the ballot paper in the language or languages in which the ballot paper is printed as per the directions issued by the Election Commission.
“It is impermissible for the Election Commission to have prescribed NOTA option in RS elections, it being an indirect means for proportional representation of States in RS,” the top court observed.
The Bench said that the option of NOTA may serve as an elixir in direct elections
but in respect of the election to the Council of States which is a different one as discussed above, it would not only undermine the purity of democracy but also serve the Satan of defection and corruption.
Last month, the Supreme Court had questioned the EC’s notification allowing NOTA option in the ballot papers for the RS polls. The option of NOTA in RS polls was introduced by the EC in 2014 but it was opposed by Congress during last year RS polls in Gujarat
Read full judgment here:
[embeddoc url=”http://legaldesire.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/23162_2017_Judgement_21-Aug-2018.pdf” download=”all”]
