AZMAT ALI vs Ch. GHULAM RASUL AND Another
This matter originated from an election dispute where an Election Tribunal declared an election void due to the violation of ballot secrecy by the Presiding Officer, who recorded voter numbers on both ballot papers and their counterparts. The respondent successfully challenged this decision in the High Court, which set aside the Tribunal's order on the basis that the violation did not materially affect the election result, as required by the governing rules. The petitioner, Azmat Ali, sought special leave to appeal against the High Court's judgment. The Supreme Court granted leave to appeal, identifying a significant legal question regarding the interpretation of the Electoral College Rules, 1964. Specifically, the Court must determine whether the High Court erred in its application of the statutory requirement that an election can only be declared void if the result was materially affected by the contravention of election rules, even where the secrecy of the ballot has been demonstrably violated. The Supreme Court suspended the High Court's order pending the final hearing of the appeal.
- Does the violation of the secrecy of the ballot by a Presiding Officer automatically invalidate an election?
- Must it be proven that an election result was materially affected by a procedural contravention before an Election Tribunal can declare an election void?
- What is the correct interpretation of Rule 36(1-A) of the Electoral College Rules 1964 regarding the invalidation of elections?
- Rule 36(1-A), Electoral College Rules 1964
ORDER
1. S. A. RAHMAN, J.-In this case it was found by the Election Tribunal that the secrecy of the ballot has been violated by the act of the Presiding Officer, who noted the numbers of the voters on the ballot papers as well as on their counterparts the Tribunal therefore set aside the election and ordered a fresh election. The respondent approached the High Court in writ jurisdiction and succeeded in obtaining an order setting aside the Election Tribunal's order dated the 5th May 1965, with no order as to costs. This is a petition for Special Leave to Appeal on behalf of Azmat Ali, calling in question the order of the High Court.
2. The learned Judges of the High Court have taken the view that rule 36(1-A) of the Electoral College Rules, 1964, only enables the Tribunal to declare an election void if the result of the election had been materially affected by reason of the failure of any person to comply with; or the contravention of any provision of the Act, or these Rules. The learned Judges were of the opinion that this condition had not been satisfied in the present case, although it was found that the secrecy of the ballot had been violated. This view of the High Court is challenged as erroneous and merits consideration. Leave to appeal is therefore, granted as prayed. The petitioner will furnish security in the sum of Rs. 1,000 prior to the appeal being heard. In the meantime, the order of the High Court shall remain suspended.