Fix poll schedule in 2 days: HC
Order to Haryana on panchayats
Tribune News Service

CHANDIGARH, Dec 21 — The Punjab and Haryana High Court today directed the Haryana Chief Minister, the state’s Election Commissioner and the Chief Secretary to file affidavits spelling out the schedule for holding panchayat elections.

Adjourning the case to December 23, Mr Justice H S Bedi and Mr Justice A S Garg, who issued this oral direction to the Haryana Advocate-General, made it clear in no uncertain terms that if the affidavits so directed were not filed, the Bench would issue an interim order on the next date of hearing specifying the schedule for holding the elections. “The state government has to adhere to the schedule,” the Judges told the Advocate-General.

The Advocate-General, however, explained to the Bench that the state government was not running away from discharging its constitutional obligation. He told the Judges that the only difficulty in holding the panchayat elections early was that the Vidhan Sabha had already been dissolved and that the Election Commission would not have enough equipment in terms of ballot boxes and security forces for holding both elections.

Speaking for the Bench, Mr Justice Bedi said: “We are not concerned with the Vidhan Sabha elections. These can be held after 17 months. Moreover, if the Election Commission can hold parliamentary elections all over the country, why can’t it hold panchayat and Assembly elections in Haryana. We shall not permit the government to dilly-dally in discharging its statutory obligation.”

During the course of proceedings spanning over one hour, Mr Justice Bedi remarked: “The court has already been cheated by the former Advocate-General of Haryana in withholding the constitutional provisions about the panchayat elections.”

The controversy over the panchayat elections erupted with the filing of a writ petition on September 7 in the High Court by Mr Surjit Singh, a resident of Nahrishi village in Naggal Assembly constituency in Ambala district praying that Ambala district elections should be postponed and electoral rolls revised because voters’ list of Nahrishi and Adomajra villages were not consistent with the Assembly list. The Bench had issued notice of motion for September 30.

The then Advocate-General of Haryana made a statement before the Bench saying that the electoral rolls of all panchayats and municipal committees in the state would be revised by June, 2000. The Bench had disposed of this petition with the direction that all electoral rolls should be completed by June, 2000.

Mr Randip Singh Surjewala, a whip and spokesman of the Congress Party, however, filed a review petition. Among others who were petitioners in the review petition are Mrs Mohini Nanda, President of the Municipal Committee, Kalka, Ms Jayanti Siwach, Chairman of the Panchayat Samiti, Julana (Jind) and Mr Ramji Lal, up-Sarpanch of Haripura village.

In the review petition they sought to be impleaded as parties and urged the court to recall its order dated September 30 permitting the state government to revise all electoral rolls by June, 2000.

In the review petition Mr Surjewala stated the Election Commission, in collusion with the state government, played a fraud on the court by withholding the constitutional provisions. Articles 243-E and 243-U mandate that elections to panchayats, panchayat samitis and zila parishads, apart from municipal committees “Shall be held before the expiry of tenure of existing bodies”.

On November 25 the state Election Commission filed a reply to the review petition saying that it had called for the record from Ambala district on receipt of notice from the High Court and that the commission had instructed its counsel to seek an adjournment on September 30 for preparing a reply.

On December 3, Mr Rajan Gupta, former counsel for the state Election Commission, filed an affidavit saying that “the deponent had prepared a detailed reply to the writ petition taking certain preliminary objections regarding constitutional and statutory bar on postponement of panchayat and municipal elections in Haryana. On September 30 when the case was fixed for hearing before the court, the Election Commissioner was present in the High Court and sitting in the Advocate-General’s office. He met him there when he received a message from him. The deponent asked him to sign the reply. However, Mr T D Jogpal, Election Commissioner, clearly refused to sign the reply.”

The affidavit further added: “The deponent received a letter from the Election Commissioner staging that it had been decided to dissociate the deponent from the case.”