Bombay High Court Cancels Ponda Bypoll, Election Commission Under Fire
In a dramatic turn of events, the Bombay High Court pulled the plug on the Ponda bypoll less than 24 hours before voting was scheduled to begin on Thursday. The decision has sparked widespread criticism, with fingers pointing squarely at the Election Commission (EC) of India for what legal experts describe as an entirely avoidable fiasco.
Legal Experts Unanimous in Condemning EC's Actions
Legal professionals are in agreement that the EC has no one to blame but itself for this debacle. The high court ruled that the EC's March 16 notification declaring the Ponda bypoll was arbitrary, as it violated Section 151A(a) of the Representation of the People Act. This provision exempts the commission from holding a byelection if the remaining term of the vacancy is less than one year.
Advocate Sandesh Padiyar expressed strong disapproval, stating, "The EC is not the Goa election commission—it is the central election commission, armed with so many resources." He emphasized that a Bombay High Court judgment on this issue was already available, and the EC should have conducted a proper study to prevent such a situation.
Allegations of Deliberate Oversight and Financial Waste
Former advocate general Saresh Lotlikar went further, suggesting the late notification was not merely an oversight. "Why did the EC notify it so late? They notified it late so that it could not be sustained," he asserted, placing the blame entirely on the EC. Lotlikar also noted that the state government did not oppose the petition, and the advocate general highlighted the legal impediment.
Both lawyers highlighted the significant human and financial costs incurred. Ballot papers were printed, logistics were arranged, candidates campaigned, and expenditures were made—all rendered futile. Padiyar remarked, "All this has gone to waste. Fingers will be pointed at the EC."
Criticism of Court's Timing and Conduct
Former state election commissioner Prabhakar Timble offered a sharper perspective on the court's actions. "I am unable to come to terms with this judgment, as courts are expected to keep their hands off once the election process is set in motion," he said. Timble questioned the timing of the order, calling it "rude and aggressive," as it provided no time for the EC, candidates, or political parties to appeal.
He added, "This order, coming 24 hours before voting, provides a comic end to the Ponda byelections."
Potential for Supreme Court Appeal and Broader Implications
Earlier in the day, Padiyar did not rule out the possibility of the EC approaching the Supreme Court overnight to seek a stay of the High Court order, citing precedents in past election-related cases. However, he acknowledged that given the late hour and the full hearing conducted, the commission might choose to let the judgment stand.
This incident raises serious questions about the EC's procedural diligence and the broader implications for election management in India. The waste of public funds and disruption caused by this cancellation underscore the need for stricter adherence to legal frameworks to prevent such occurrences in the future.
