Summary
The Supreme Court rejected a challenge to the Bhandara–Gondiya parliamentary bye-election. For the one-year exception in section 151A, the remaining term was assessed when the vacancy arose on acceptance of the member’s resignation, rather than by the new member’s anticipated effective working period. With more than a year remaining and no pending election petition, the statutory obligation to fill the vacancy applied. Election expenditure and the future model code of conduct did not justify leaving the constituency unrepresented.
Issues
- When the remaining term is assessed for the one-year exception to the statutory bye-election requirement.
- Whether election costs or the anticipated model code of conduct justify avoiding a bye-election.
Provisions considered
- Section 151A, Representation of the People Act, 1951The six-month requirement runs from occurrence of the vacancy, subject to the two statutory exceptions. The one-year exception did not apply because the term remaining when resignation was accepted exceeded a year; the certification exception was not in issue. (¶¶ 9, 10, 16)
Held
- The vacancy arose on 14 December 2017 when the Speaker accepted the resignation. With the next general election due in June 2019, the remainder of the term exceeded one year. The petitioner could not substitute the anticipated working period after a May 2018 election for that statutory measure. (¶¶ 4, 5, 8, 16)
- The prospect of the model code of conduct operating before the general election did not shorten the remaining statutory term. The financial burden of conducting the bye-election also supplied no ground to avoid representation. (¶ 16)
- The Court distinguished vacancies affected by pending election petitions seeking a declaration that another candidate was duly elected. Section 151A’s non obstante clause does not override the relevant election-petition provisions; no such petition was pending here. (¶¶ 13, 14, 15, 16)
- The challenge did not concern certification by the Election Commission, in consultation with the Central Government, that holding the bye-election within six months was difficult. That separate statutory exception was left outside the decision. (¶¶ 10, 16)
Result
Special leave petition dismissed; no order as to costs. The High Court’s refusal to restrain the bye-election was sustained.