Delhi High Court rejects plea against election of Nitish Kumar as JDU President

The Delhi High Court recently rejected a plea challenging the election of Bihar Chief Minister Nitish Kumar as the President of Janata Dal United (JDU) [Govind Yadav v Union of India & Ors]..In an order passed on August 29, Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav said that the plea filed by former JDU member Govind Yadav lacked merit and there was no compelling reason to interfere with the internal party changes made by the JDU.“The petition lacks merit and falls outside the jurisdictional scope of Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Consequently, the writ petition is hereby dismissed along with pending application(s). No order as to costs,” the Court said..Yadav's plea had sought annulment of the changes incorporated in the records of the JDU maintained by the Election Commission of India (ECI).It was his argument that the changes were in violation of Section 29(A)(9) of the Representation of the People Act.Section 29A (9) lays down that after an association or body has been registered as a political party, any change in its name, head office, office-bearers, address or in any other material matters should be communicated to the ECI without delay.Yadav had further asked the Court to declare that the internal party elections conducted by JDU in the years 2016, 2019, and 2022 were in breach of the party’s constitution..The Court observed that the dispute raised by Yadav was earlier raised by one faction of the JDU and ECI had ruled in favour of Kumar in November 2017.“This faction [led by Nitish Kumar] demonstrated overwhelming majority support, both within the legislative wing and the National Council of the party, which is the apex organizational body. Consequently, the interim order recognized the group led by Mr. Nitish Kumar as the legitimate JDU faction under paragraph 15 of the Symbols Order. As a result, this faction was granted the entitlement to use the reserved symbol, the Arrow, as the officially recognized State party in Bihar,” the Court noted.Justice Kaurav held that the nature of the reliefs sought by Yadav fell wholly outside the ambit of the inquiry contemplated under Section 29A of the Representation of People Act..Advocate Pathak Rakesh Kaushik appeared for petitioner Govind Yadav.Advocates Sidhant Kumar and Om Batra appeared for the Election Commission of India. .[Read Judgment]