Madras HC orders completion of TN Local Body Elections by November 17

The Madras High Court’s First Bench of Chief Justice Indira Banerjee and Justice M Sundar has directed the Tamil Nadu State Election Commission to complete the long overdue local body elections by November 17. Notifications for the same are to be published by September 18..The High Court yesterday disposed of two petitions, one preferred by NGO CHANGEindia and the other by the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) party. Senior Advocate NL Rajah appeared on behalf of CHANGEindia, whereas Senior Advocate P Wilson argued for the DMK. An appeal preferred by the State Election Commission in the matter was also disposed of by the common judgement..CHANGEindia had challenged the constitutionality of amendments made to the Tamil Nadu Municipal Act and the Tamil Nadu Panchayat Act in 2016 and subsequent government notifications. These enabled the appointment of Special Officers for urban and rural local bodies, and the extension of their tenure for the interim period when there were no elected representatives owing to pending litigation. The DMK party had sought expeditious conduct of the local body elections in compliance with Articles 243K and 243ZA of the Constitution..Elections were directed to be held within the aforementioned date in view of the mandatory provisions under Articles 243E and 243U of the Constitution, as per which the duration of the Panchayats and Municipalities is fixed to a maximum period of five years. In this regard, the Court unequivocally held,.“The constitutional mandate is, thus, absolutely clear. A duration of a municipality cannot be continued beyond a period of five years, in view of Article 243-U of the Constitution.Similarly, Article 243-E of the Constitution of India makes it absolutely clear that the duration of a panchayat cannot continue beyond five years from the date appointed for its first meeting.”.The High Court relied on the cases of Kishansing Tomar v. Municipal Corporation of the City of Ahmedabad and others and Lakshmi Charan Sen v. A.K.M. Hassan Uzzaman to hold,.“…the Election Commission is to complete election to municipal bodies before the expiration of five years. It is not to put forward any excuse on unreasonable grounds to postpone elections. Any revision of electoral rolls are to be carried out in time and if it cannot be carried out within a reasonable time, the election has to be conducted on the basis of the then existing rolls.”.Notifications to hold the elections in October 2016 had been earlier challenged by the DMK on grounds, inter alia, that reservation and rotation of seats had not been implemented as per updated census data or prescribed norms. On considering the matter, Justice N Kirubakaran had quashed the the notifications, holding that the SEC had issued the same in violation of Rule 24 of the Tamil Nadu Panchayats (Elections) Rules, 1995..The single judge also issued a series of conditions to be complied with by the SEC and passed orders that the election be completed thereafter by December 31, 2016. Notable among the nine directions issued by the judge to maintain purity in public life, was the condition that candidates should be made to furnish full information in five categories, including criminal antecedents, through an affidavit. The affidavit was ordered to be published online and the SEC was directed to sensitise the public regarding the availability of such information..In an effort to prevent criminalisation of local bodies, the SEC, in exercise of Article 243K of the Constitution, was asked to recommend that recognised and registered political parties not field/sponsor any candidate with a criminal background..An appeal was made by the SEC against the single judge verdict primarily on grounds that it was impossible to conduct the elections by December 2016 in compliance with all the issued directions. This also naturally meant that the elections were delayed further..The High Court today dismissed the apprehensions of the SEC that it would be unable to upload affidavits of candidates as ordered by the single judge. Emphasising on the importance publishing such information, the Court held,.“…the Court in exercise of its power of judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is not precluded from giving directions with regard to putting up the affidavits in the public domain. Posting of affidavits on the website is the best form of disclosure, as all electors can conveniently access the website. The vague assertion of the possibility of the website crashing is, in our view, no ground to withhold relevant information from candidates.”.It was clarified that this did not imply that the entire affidavits of the candidates have to be uploaded. Instead, the SEC is expected to maintain an accurate, consolidated database of the details provided in the affidavits regarding the candidates’ credentials and antecedents..As regards the vires of the impugned amendments, the Court noted that it cannot decide on the same as there were connected appeals currently pending before the Supreme Court, for which directions are likely to be passed later this month..Read order below.