Discuss the procedures to decide the disputes arising out of the election of a Member of the Parliament or State Legislature…

Disputes over election of an MP or MLA are decided by the High Court under ss.80-81 of the RPA, 1951. An election petition, in prescribed form, with security deposit and court fee, must be filed within 45 days of the date of election. It is tried by a single judge, who has civil-court powers under the CPC, including discovery, inspection and summoning witnesses. Ponnuswami v. Returning Officer (1952) held that under Article 329(b) an election can be questioned only by an election petition.

Under s.100, a returned candidate’s election is void if (a) on the date of election he was not qualified, or was disqualified, under the Constitution, the RPA or the Government of Union Territories Act, 1963; (b) a corrupt practice was committed by him, his election agent, or any other person with his or the agent’s consent; or (c) any nomination was improperly rejected. It is also void if the result, so far as the returned candidate is concerned, was materially affected by improper acceptance of a nomination, a corrupt practice by any other agent in his interest, improper reception, refusal or rejection of any vote or reception of a void vote, or non-compliance with the Constitution, the Act or rules. Under s.101 the court may further declare the petitioner or another candidate duly elected. Kultar Singh v. Mukhtiar Singh (1965) interpreted corrupt practices; Mohinder Singh Gill v. CEC (1978) clarified the scope of election petitions.

Against the High Court’s decision, the aggrieved party may appeal to the Supreme Court under s.116A within 30 days. Its decision is final; Articles 226 and 32 cannot disturb it. This time-bound, specialised procedure protects electoral integrity by confining challenges to defined legal grounds.