New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Wednesday directed the Andhra Pradesh State Election Commission (SEC) to examine allegations that candidates of the Y.S. Jagan Mohan Reddy-led YSRCP were prevented from filing nominations for Urban Local Body elections and decide by Thursday whether the deadline should be extended in affected municipalities.
A Bench of Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana ordered the state poll panel to keep the final list of contesting candidates on hold until October 25, pending its decision on the representations and evidence submitted by the YSRCP and other candidates.
The Justice Bagchi-led Bench said that wherever an extension is granted, candidates must be given at least 48 hours from the publication of the SEC’s decision to submit their nomination papers.
The election notification will have to be amended accordingly, the apex court ordered. It also directed the Director General of Police (DGP) to ensure adequate security at nomination centres, including police deployment and CCTV coverage, and file a compliance report.
The Supreme Court further asked the respective Superintendents of Police to provide protection to YSRCP candidates and directed that nomination papers be received by Collectors at district headquarters wherever necessary.
Observing that free and fair elections are part of the basic structure of the Constitution, the Justice Bagchi-led Bench said the right to participate in elections by filing nominations is an integral facet of the electoral process.
It said that constitutional courts could not remain entirely silent when allegations of obstruction in filing nomination papers were brought before them by a principal Opposition party, particularly when the party had submitted representations and supporting material even before the election process commenced.
“Instilling confidence in the election process is vital for the maintenance of constitutional democracy,” the Supreme Court said, stressing the need for the state authorities to ensure a level playing field.
The SEC has been asked to assess the representations on their merits, along with documentary and electronic evidence, and take appropriate measures to ensure that eligible candidates are not denied an opportunity to contest.
The matter will be heard again on October 27, when the state poll panel and the state government are required to submit compliance affidavits.
The directions came on a Special Leave Petition (SLP) filed by the YSRCP challenging an order of the Andhra Pradesh High Court, which refused to extend the deadline for filing nominations amid allegations of violence and obstruction during the local body election process.
The party had alleged that its candidates were prevented from filing nomination papers in several areas, including Punganur, Rayachoti, Kadapa and Tirupati, after the nomination process opened on October 16.
According to the petition, nomination papers of a candidate in Kadapa were allegedly seized and torn, while several candidates in Tirupati were prevented from entering the rooms of the Returning Officers concerned.
It also alleged that party workers and MP P.V. Midhun Reddy were attacked while travelling to file nomination papers.
The YSRCP had initially approached the High Court seeking alternative nomination centres with adequate security.
A single judge, on October 15, declined to grant the blanket relief sought but allowed individual candidates facing threats to approach the Election Officers concerned, for permission to file nominations at alternative locations.
The party subsequently sought a one-day extension of the nomination deadline, contending that the alleged disruptions had deprived its candidates of an opportunity to contest the elections.
Dismissing the application on October 18, a Division Bench of the High Court held that the nomination period had expired and that extending it at that stage would amount to interference with the election process.
The High Court also observed that the relief sought went beyond the scope of the original writ petition.
In its SLP before the Supreme Court, the YSRCP contended that restrictions on judicial intervention in election matters should not prevent constitutional courts from issuing directions to safeguard the conduct of free and fair polls.
–IANS–
